Introduction to Research on Social Work Practice Special Issue: Program Theory in Social Interventions Developed in Practice Settings

Abstract

Solving individual, group, or societal problems through social intervention in practice settings is a complex task. The extent to which this end is achieved depends heavily on the effectiveness of the change strategies in use. Increased understanding of how these change strategies work to impact outcomes is at the forefront of the science of social intervention. In this special issue, we have gathered a collection of seven articles that present central issues related to program theory in social interventions developed in practice setting. Our goal is to advance the knowledge of how an understanding of theory in practice can advance social intervention research.

Solving individual, group, or societal problems through social intervention in practice settings is a complex task. The extent to which this end is achieved depends heavily on the effectiveness of the change strategies in use. Increased understanding of how these change strategies work to impact outcomes is at the forefront of the science of social intervention. In ideal scientific circumstances, social interventions are developed based on a clear understanding of what is known from basic and applied research about a given problem, its associated risk and protective factors, how it develops and changes over time, and the populations that are most vulnerable to the problem (Fraser & Galinsky, 2010; Fraser et al., 2009). This information is then used as the starting point from which interventions to address a given problem, for a given group, in a given context are conceptualized and developed (Fraser & Galinsky, 2010; Fraser et al., 2009). This conceptual model of how an intervention is intended to bring about change is known as a program theory in the scientific literature (cf. logic model, theory of change, change theory, etc.; Fraser et al., 2009; Funnell & Rogers, 2011; Rey et al., 2011; Rossi et al., 2004).

Social interventions, however, often originate in practice settings (Sundell et al., 2015) and the theoretical understanding of how practice leads to change, either implicit or explicit, may be inferior to other concerns within practice settings (Chen & Garbe, 2011). Understanding more fully the theoretical process of change underlying interventions used in practice settings will help us better understand the relationship between the science and practice of social work. At present, there is a need for more research and theory development which addresses the use of theory in practice an area that has been underutilized in the development of intervention science. The purpose of this special issue is to increase our understanding of how social work interventions developed in practice settings are intended to work to achieve desired outcomes.

The catalyst for this special issue is four-fold and based on our own experience in conducting intervention research over the past 20 years. First, there has been much attention in the literature on the conduct of research to test and assess the effectiveness of social interventions (Flay et al., 2005; Gottfredson et al., 2015; Sundell & Olsson, 2017). However, the testing of intervention effectiveness is the final step in an intervention development process that has not been fully described or investigated in the literature. Second, many interventions in use today have been developed in practice settings which may mean that they are not specified to the extent necessary to be included in controlled research (Chen & Garbe, 2011). Understanding the theoretical starting point for these interventions is essential for the development of intervention science in practice settings. Third, there is an emerging policy interest in developing ways in which practitioners may be better supported in developing and choosing interventions to use in practice with the first element of a promising practice being its firm rooting in a well-defined theory (e.g., The Danish National Board of Health and Welfare, 2021). Fourth, the application and use of theory in practice may not always be beneficial to service users (Kennedy et al., 2002; Lilienfield, 2004; Lilienfield et al., 2014; Olofsson et al., 2016; Thyer, 2012). This necessitates efforts to better understand the role of theory in social interventions used in practice settings.

In this special issue, we have gathered a collection of seven articles that respond to some of these, as well as other, central issues related to program theory in social interventions developed in practice setting. Our goal is to advance the knowledge of how an understanding of theory in practice can advance social intervention research.

In the first article, Hong et al. (this issue) apply a practice-based program theory in workforce development and the measures of its theoretical components to design a financial empowerment intervention. Psychological Self-Sufficiency (PSS) is the practice theory with the change process captured by the Perceived Employment Barrier Scale and the Employment Hope Scale. Based on this PSS theory, the intervention Transforming Impossible into Possible (TIP) was developed. An adaptation of this intervention, TIP for Financial Capability, is supported by the newly conceptualized Financial Psychological Self-Sufficiency. Hong and colleagues then test the validity of the Perceived Financial Barriers Scale and Financial Hope Scale and examines how these measures along with elements of TIP are associated with financial capability.

This issue continues with an article by Baviskar et al. (this issue) who present primary research investigating the application of theory in interventions developed and used in practice settings in Denmark. They argue that to fulfill supervision and counselling responsibilities to foster parents, social workers need an effective way to indirectly monitor foster children's mental health and learning ability. They discuss this within a model of tripartite parenthood. The article describes how an intervention is being developed with the aim of enhancing parental monitoring and describe this as a protective factor in family foster care.

Thereafter, Kirzner et al. (this issue) contribute to the special issue by evaluating Self-Determination Theory (SDT) through the lens of social work values. In their contribution, Kirzner et al. suggest ways to effectively apply SDT to social service interventions and present an example program in which the authors used SDT to develop and evaluate an intervention. SDT according to Kirzner et al. is an evidence-based approach to programs promoting behavioral change. As social work researchers are increasingly incorporating SDT into program planning and evaluation it is curious that SDT has not been fully evaluated for congruence with social work values and perspectives. This may be due to SDTs origin in psychology. Kirzner et al. compare the core tenets of SDT to values found within the United States’ National Association of Social Workers Code of Ethics and find that there is significant overlap between SDT and social work values and suggest that SDT can be a powerful tool for planning and evaluation of social interventions.

In the fourth article, Olsson et al. (this issue) contend that program theory reconstruction is an often-overlooked aspect of social intervention research. In this article, Olsson et al. argue that intervention research benefits if the research design is informed by the specific intervention's program theory (i.e., the idea of how the intervention is supposed to lead to the intended outcomes). They then offer a comprehensive and accessible guide to program theory reconstruction in research on social interventions and provide arguments as to how program theory reconstruction can be used to benefit intervention studies.

In the fifth contribution in this special issue, Sundell et al. (this issue) raise the issue that in the field of social work, practitioners are often faced with situations in which they must choose an intervention. A difficulty for practitioners may be how to determine which interventions to choose when high-quality research on the effectiveness of interventions is lacking. Based on their experience training social workers in Sweden, Sundell et al. present a tentative model for how practitioners may assess the quality of interventions when scientific evidence is sparse.

In the sixth article, Cox et al. (this issue) discuss program theory and the crafting of long-term care based educational trainings, derived from implementing mandated legislative policy in New Jersey. Cox et al. apply program theory to explain how trainings were designed and implemented and illustrate how, at times, change mechanisms may not be contained within the intervention itself, but instead a response that intervention activities generate. In their example, program activities triggered desirable mechanisms which led to desired educational outcomes.

Finally, Petersen et al. (this issue) argue that research in social work must reflect both evidence and relevance. Therefore, one needs to explain the results of an intervention through causal analysis and seek to understand its content and processes through inquiring into the meaning and action within the intervention. Petersen et al. argue that the modern view of causality is dominated by David Hume's idea that causality is the relation between two prior events called cause and effect. However, Petersen et al. argue that Aristotle's reasoning on causality goes far beyond Hume's by including four forms of causality. One of which corresponds with Hume's idea of causality. This article considers how Aristotle's notion of causality can provide new insights on how to examine interventions in social work to address effects. That is, what works as well as why it works thereby bringing science closer to opening the black box of social intervention.

Taken together, the collection of articles presented in this special issue help us move closer to understanding how social work interventions developed in practice settings are intended to work to achieve desired outcomes. Each article, in its own, unique way, provides us with new perspective on a complex issue. As special issue editors, we are grateful to all the scholars who submitted their work, the authors who contributed to this special issue, and the many reviewers who helped bring out the best of the contributions received. We are especially thankful to Professor Bruce A. Thyer, Editor-in-Chief of Research on Social Work Practice for his kind support and guidance in putting this special issue together. We hope that a wide audience, including researchers, practitioners, and policy makers interested in social interventions, will find this special issue informative and helpful to their work, and we look forward to see how the contributions spur future efforts to advance our understanding of program theory in social interventions developed in practice settings.