The major findings have been comprehensively discussed and interpreted within the context of previous studies conducted by a number of researchers, especially in addressing the more pressing issues encountered by marginalized populations in their daily activities and interactions with other people.
The participants in this study willingly shared their perceptions and experience of risk for HIV/AIDS within the context of their social and ecological environments and, in so doing, embodied other models of interaction and behavior developed through previous research, such as “…Bronfenbrenner’s (1995) model for the interactional and ecological dynamics of development and Caputo’s (1995) characterization of children and youths as active agents in their own behalf” (Anderson et al., 2001, p. 353). It is worth noting that the adolescents studied in this research demonstrated more concerns related to their social relationships at home, school and in their neighborhoods than on how they were concerned about the risks posed by HI, V/AIDS.
The concerns raised related more to gangs, drugs, and violence than to HIV, thus reinforcing Bronfenbrenner’s model, mentioned above. The present study also revealed that there was a problem in the flow of information and knowledge on HIV/AIDS among adolescents in juvenile detention, a problem that had been noted by other researchers interested in marginalized populations. In this perspective, it can be safely argued that the study’s major findings were evaluated, construed, and discussed within the context of prior research.
The present study demonstrated a pattern of correlations consistent with theories and models discussed by previous researchers and, as such, it can be argued that the existing causal inferences were justified. For instance, the inadequate definition and unique perceptions for HIV/AIDS among participants has been positively correlated to the fact that these youths are in juvenile detention, with the justification coming from previous studies that found that there exist limited information and knowledge on HIV/AIDS among marginalized populations (Anderson et al, 2001). This level of consistency justifies the causal inference.
The interpretations given in this study are consistent with the study results and limitations since they take into account the present state of the adolescent understudy and attempt to account for their views and perspectives from the standpoint of a marginalized population. The interpretations take into consideration the various hindrances that exist for the incarcerated adolescents to get the needed information on HIV/AIDS, and the negative sentiments the wider society may have against this group of the population (Anderson et al., 2001). In essence, the interpretations have been presented from the viewpoint of the adolescents, deeply considering their social world and interactions as major determinants of their constructed perceptions.
The study addresses the issue of generalizability of results by gaining a deeper insight into the fact that most adolescents have the necessary knowledge needed to curb the spread of HIV/AIDS, and what is actually needed is a harmonization of their own perceptions of the realities of the disease.
The major implication for the study is that researchers, health professionals, and educators should take advantage of the demonstrated desire by the adolescents to execute active interventions regarding HIV/AIDS to not only change their views and perception, but to use this orientation “…in planning future AIDS education courses by making the adolescents who are the target of their programs into equal partners in the education enterprise” (Anderson et al., 2001, p. 355).
However, it remains unclear how the various perceptions demonstrated by the adolescents in the study become a vital resource, especially after their admission that they do not consider the risks of HIV/AIDS as an immediate threat. This is a major weakness of the study. The study, nevertheless, draws strength in combining participatory research strategies with other selected methodologies such as individual interviews and focus groups (Anderson et al, 2001, p. 343) to better understand the perceptions about risks for HIV/AIDS progressed by adolescents serving time in juvenile detention.
References
Anderson, N.L.R., Nyamathi, A., McAvoy, J.A., Conde, F., & Casey, C. (2001). Perceptions about risks for HIV/AIDS among adolescents in juvenile detention. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 23(4), 336-359.