The role of behavior and cultural perceptions cannot be overestimated in terms of health aspects. In that regard, it can be stated that the success of many interventions is largely linked to the behavior and cultural and social constructs. The latter is not only connected to treating diseases and illnesses such as alcoholism, but also to preventive measures in lifestyle illnesses such as diabetes. In “Formative Research to Inform Intervention Development for Diabetes Prevention in the Republic of the Marshall Islands” by Cortes, Gittelsohn, Alfred, and Palafox (2001), formative research was conducted to investigate behavioral patterns and traditional belief systems in the Republic of the Marshall Islands, in order to help to develop a diabetes prevention intervention. This paper provides a critical analysis of the aforementioned article, in terms of its methodological considerations.
As qualitative studies, in general, are aimed to provide “target audience perceptions and reactions” (Siegel & Doner, 2007, p. 264), it can be stated that the choice of employing a qualitative method in Cortes et al. (2001) is successful. It can be seen that many of the variables such as typical meals, the typical way of eating, and access to food are quantifiable, and can be categorized into distinct categories, and thus, questions such as how many and how often can be applicable. Nevertheless, it should be stated that such variables are not related to the main research questions of the article, which are founded on getting an insight into the perceptions and the local cultural norms of the population. The household quantitative survey in the study served as audience segmentation, in which dimensions related to the context of the study were grouped, i.e. anthropometric measurements, demographics, food frequency, etc (Cortes, Gittelsohn, Alfred, & Palafox, 2001, p. 700). The choice of demographics, however, is often criticized for grouping “people together based on variables that are meaningless in the context of changing behavior in question” (Siegel & Doner, 2007, pp. 265-266).
It can be stated that the main aim of formative studies is in adequately crafting the initiatives (278). Accordingly, the findings of the study as well as its implications should be directly linked with the intended outcome. As the findings of the study are already incorporated in the program at the time of the publication, their assessment can be generally performed with an evaluation of the program’s outcome. Nevertheless, it can be stated that the study failed to provide a link between the rationale of the study, its research questions, and its implications. In that regard, it can be assumed that the answer to the fourth research question should be interpreted from the findings, i.e. “how the information can be used to develop effective interventions” (Cortes, et al., 2001, p. 699). The connection between the guiding principles developed in the program and the outcomes of the research is vague, given that these guidelines represent the answer to the question of how information can be used.
The article can be considered academically valuable, in terms of providing directions for actions. The incorporation of the guiding principles can be separated from the scope of the article as the connection between the results and the implementation should be explained in detail. Nevertheless, the article provides a valuable insight into the behavioral patterns hindering effective prevention interventions.
References
Cortes, L. M., Gittelsohn, J., Alfred, J., & Palafox, N. A. (2001). Formative Research to Inform Intervention Development for Diabetes Prevention in the Republic of the Marshall Islands. Health Education & Behavior, 28(6), 696-715. Web.
Siegel, M., & Doner, L. (2007). Marketing public health : strategies to promote social change (2nd ed.). Sudbury, Mass.: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.