Essay on Medical Social Work And Theory

Essay on Medical Social Work And Theory

Introduction

Professional interventions are often based on several models that make an attempt at explaining the health of people according to their behavior, in behavioral medicine. This is what is termed as the Health behavior theory. Health behavior theories include; social cognitive theory (SCT), The theories of reasoned Action (TRA), theories of planned behavior (TPB), protection motivation theory (PMT), and health belief model. The theories that are used most often are the social cognitive theory, health belief model and theory of planned behavior. This paper is mainly focused on discussing about the social cognitive theory in detail.

The Social Cognitive Theory

The social cognitive theory initially begun as the social learning theory and was developed in the year 1960 by Albert Bandura, a pioneer in social cognitive theory. It asserts that learning takes place in a social context that has a dynamic and reciprocal interaction of the person, behavior and environment. The social cognitive theory is unique in that; it emphasizes on social influence as well as external and internal social reinforcement Bandura (1990). A person’s past experiences are taken into account which determines if a behavioral action will take place or not.

Social cognitive theory has the main goal of achieving a behavior that can be maintained or sustained overtime. Bandura (1990), says that this is achieved through explaining the way people regulate their behavior through reinforcement and control as well as focusing on the environment in which the behavior occurs and the unique methods in which individuals acquire and maintain behavior. Sustainability is a trait that is unique to social cognitive theory unlike other theories who focus on initiating the behavior rather than maintenance of the behavior Bandura (1990).

Constructs of Social Cognitive Theory

1. Reciprocal Determinism

The interaction of social cognitive theory is mainly demonstrated by a construct called Reciprocal determinism. According to Bandura (1990), personal factors influence each other for instance there is a way environmental factors and behavioral factors constantly interact by influencing and getting influenced by the other, kind of a symbiotic relationship. Reciprocal determinism is used by considering more than one ways of altering behavior Cohen et al. (2006). For example; changing the environment and also targeting knowledge and attitudes.

2. Outcome Expectations

Outcome expectations refer to beliefs, probabilities and likelihoods of the consequences that come due to behavioral choices. A good example is a study that was conducted to find out to which extent positive outcome expectations will affect the disclosure of HIV positive status to sexual partners Winters et al. (2003). Some people believed that their partners would reject them; some thought their partners would not trust them while others feared that their partners would reject them if they told them they are HIV positive Winters et al. (2003). This construct is used by demonstrating positive outcomes of performing a desired behavior.

3. Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy refers to the confidence and believing in a person’s ability to exhibit a certain behavior. According to Bandura (1990), the nature of self-efficacy is that it is task specific, in that it increases and decreases depending on the specific task or tasks in areas related to it. The same HIV disclosure study was applied to expound on the aspects of self-efficacy. Some people were of the opinion that they would not have a problem bringing up their HIV- positive status with any sexual partner they indulged with. The use of self-efficacy can be achieved by breaking down any change in behavior into steps that are small and measurable Kane et al. (2004). Participants should be allowed to recognize and celebrate any small changes and especially improvements while on their path to an even larger behavioral change.

4. Collective Efficacy

This construct is closely related to the construct of self-efficacy. Collective efficacy means believing that a group of persons has the ability to carry out certain actions that will lead to the change that is so desired. Collective efficacy can also be referred to as a situation where members of the community are willing to intervene in order to help others Bandura (1990). An example of this can be brought out by conducting a study that will explain the relationship between neighbors and the extent to which participants felt they have; adults that children can look up to, adults that can watch out for the safety of the children, how closed-knit is the community and people who show willingness in helping neighbors, et cetera, et cetera. To achieve this, people need to be mobilized and brought together to action and also encourage people to come together in groups that can increase their confidence in each other in order to attain the desired change Cohen et al. (2006).

5. Self- Regulation

This simply means the ability of a person to control themselves through activities such as; self-instruction, self-monitoring, goal-setting, self-reward, feedback, and self enlisting Cohen et, al. (2006). Self-regulation was divided into five in a study that attempted to explain free time among students in high school. According to Winters et al. (2003), the domains are; gaining and maintaining social support, goal-setting, self-reward, planning to overcome barriers and securing reinforcements. Individuals are therefore advised to set goals that are at least realistic and measurable as well as giving themselves time for reflection about failing or meeting their goals.

6. Facilitation/ Behavioral Capabilities

This means trying to make it easier for individuals to perform new behavior through providing tools, resources and any requisite environmental changes cohen et al. (2006). The Minnesota Smoking Prevention Program carried out an evaluation on students of the sixth grade to determine how capable they are of resisting smoking images. This clearly brought out as a person’s ability to identify, evaluate and reject something that is not good Bandura (1990). This can be achieved by providing role models who are capable of being looked up to and who also reflect the desired behavior. .

Limitations of Social Cognitive Theory

Social cognitive theory has several limitations which should be taken into account especially while using the theory in the public health field. One of the limitations is that the theory assumes it is automatic that when the environment changes, an individual changes as well, which is not always true Winters et al. (2003). Second, entirely rationalizing the theory can be a bit of a problem especially because the theory is broad-reaching. The third limitation is that it pays very little attention to factors such as emotion or motivation. According to Kane et al. (2004), the theory also does not regard biological predispositions which could influence behavioral changes.

Applying Social Cognitive Theory in Healthcare

The social cognitive theory has been used a lot of times in promotion of healthcare, especially because it emphasizes on the environment and also because many levels of ecology are considered.  In the view of Winters et al. (2003), this is a huge area of focus in the recent years and even in the future. This theory is going to help educators keep individuals informed and encourage them to be more proactive. Kane et al. (2004), asserts that this is also going to address myths and misconceptions about the healthcare fields as well as providing remedies to them. Health educators can also inform people on how they can make changes to their environment in order to participate in healthcare awareness.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we can say that the social cognitive theory that aids in understanding behaviors of people, both individuals and groups. The environment as well as plasticity are very vital and essential in the behavioral changes of an individual. Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory basically revolves around the regard to humans as creatures that are self organizing, proactive, self-regulating as well as

Works Cited

Bandura, A. (1990). “Mechanisms of moral disengagement.” In W. Reich (Ed.), Origins of             terrorism: Psychologies, ideologies, theologies, states of mind. Cambridge:                   Cambridge University Press.

Cohen D.A., Finch B.K, Bower A, Sastry N. 2006, “Collective Efficacy and Obesity”: The          potential influence of social factors on health. Social Science & Medicine

Kane R.L., Johnson PE, Town RJ, Butler M. , 2004, “A Structured Review of the Effect of         Economic Incentives on Consumers’Preventive Behavior.” American Journal of                                              Preventive Medicine

Winters E, Petosa R, Charleton T., 2003, “Using Social Cognitive Theory to Explain                                 Discretionary “Leisure-time” Physical Exercise Among High School Students”. Journal                             of Adolescent Health