Towards more rigorous evaluation of health promotion programmes

Bibliographic Data

ID11510430
AuthorsNeville Owens (0000-0003-2784-4820, The University of Adelaide, corresponding author), Neville Owen (Foundation for Multidisciplinary Education in Community Health, University of Adelaide), Christina Lee (0000-0003-3138-9867, Lincoln Institute of Health Sciences)
Year1986
Volume21
Issue1
Pages79-91
Publication date1986-03-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAustralian Psychologist (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0005-0067 • E-ISSN: 1742-9544
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/00050068608256489
OpenAlexW2024852330
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited31

Psychological theory and research have much to contribute in strengthening the development and evaluation of health promotion programmes. It is argued that programmes, large-scale campaigns and public policy should be anchored more firmly in basic research, but that there are inevitable incompatibilities between maximal validity and ideal generality of behavioural research in health promotion. However, compromises may be sought which attempt to maximize both validity and generality. Conditions for enhancing the strength of inferences from the evaluation of health behaviour-change programmes are outlined, and two field experiments which examine the impact of self-instructional behaviour-change methods for community programmes are used as examples

Behavior change · External validity · Generality · Health promotion · Ideal (ethics · Management science · Political science · Promotion (chess · Psychotherapist · Public health · Public relations · Scale (ratio · Applied Psychology · Community Health and Development · Engineering · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Health Policy Implementation Science · Medicine · Nursing · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub