The self-consistency and applicability of research frameworks to specific practice problems affect the scientific value of studies and research projects to a large degree. Considering this, the use of framework evaluation strategies can be cited among the prerequisites to progress in treatment and care delivery. This paper seeks to evaluate the theoretical framework in Zakour’s (2019) study and consider its applications to the issue of internalized stigma.
The Theoretical Framework and Its Appropriateness
In the selected source, Zakour (2019) aims to increase the scientific community’s awareness of the need for macro-level interventions that would address disaster survivors’ mental health needs and effectively prevent the outbreaks of mental health diseases, such as PTSD and mood disorders, after large-scale emergencies. In the purpose statement, the researcher focuses on the scarcity of studies that would extensively review a multitude of approaches to post-disaster interventions. Moreover, he expresses the willingness to fill in the specified gap by exploring the most recent theoretical developments.
Framework Description
The basic step in framework evaluation is to provide its description based on the article of interest. The theoretical framework in Zakour’s (2019) study is the so-called V+ theory. The theory was formulated by this researcher and his co-authors in a few works dated between 2013 and 2018, including the book on the role of mental health in disaster responses to Hurricane Katrina (Zakour, 2019). V+ theory centers on the practice-related concepts from vulnerability and resilience theories previously proposed by other researchers in the fields of social work and mental health. However, in this very article, Zakour (2019) explains the framework only partially, by comparing some of its aspects and variables, for instance, economic ones, to those of the simpler models of resilience. In his literature review, the researcher does not provide explicit and non-abstract conceptual definitions. Instead, he prefers to accentuate the complexity of the key concepts, for instance, by explaining the multidimensionality of vulnerability to disasters and citing the fact that the concept of resilience cannot be limited to the level of community.
Logical Structure and Methodology
Assessing the structure and internal consistency of theoretical frameworks assists in understanding research outcomes. Zakour’s (2019) V+ theory informs his assessment of macro-level post-disaster interventions and is closely linked to two different parent theories, but whether the definitions of resilience and vulnerability have been adopted from them without changes is not stated explicitly, whereas the meaning of empowerment is said to remain the same. The references to current scholarly literature, including the works on resilience by Norris and his co-authors, are extensive, which allows deriving the conceptual definitions, and Zakour (2019) also presents rather logical and defensible relational statements. In particular, Zakour (2019) explains empowerment’s role in guaranteeing access to social resources, increasing resilience in post-disaster recovery, and reducing vulnerability. Finally, the degree to which the framework informs the methodology is challenging to estimate since the process of literature search and the selection criteria are not explained in detail.
The Framework’s Appropriateness and Connections with the Findings
Based on the analysis summarized above, despite the absence of clear definitions and explanations of how the framework has informed literature selection, the author manages to link the identified trends to V+ theory, which supports the theory’s appropriateness for studying interventions to alleviate disaster survivors’ suffering. For example, he supposes that all post-disaster interventions from the literature could be justified using V+ theory since they contain measures focused on improving resilience and reducing vulnerability to further emergencies and their consequences (Zakour, 2019). Additionally, Zakour’s (2019) framework is appropriate for the topic because it proposes “a proactive approach to disasters,” and both the framework and currently used interventions emphasize loss reduction (p. 21). Therefore, in the study, the framework is applicable to the identified practice problem.
Insights and Takeaways
For me, the opportunity to apply framework analysis techniques has resulted in three critical takeaways. To start with, the experience reinforced my understanding of the importance of clear links between concepts in scientific research. Similarly to the skeletal system that supports organs in the human body, the theoretical framework establishes and solidifies the structure of planned research projects, thus putting more clarity into the central assumptions informing the approach to exploration (Varpio et al., 2020). Next, framework evaluation is basically a research-intensive activity by itself since it may require expanding one’s scope and getting acquainted with the author’s previous works or all stated parent theories. Particularly, the absence of clearly defined theoretical principles in Zakour’s (2019) study is deceptive since all concepts of V+ theory have been operationalized and justified in his previous reports. Finally, this practice of framework evaluation has enabled me to recognize the common sources of methodological flaws, such as the incorrect and incomplete adoption of constructs from parent theories. These takeaways will support me in planning and structuring my own research endeavors as a student.
V+ Theory and Internalized Stigma in Patients
As a mental health nurse in an inpatient mental health facility, I have encountered a variety of practice problems, including patients’ negative and counterproductive beliefs about treatment. The detrimental influence of internalized mental health stigma on patients’ timeliness of referral, attitudes to treatment, and a belief in recovery is what interests me most. V+ theory could be applied to the issue since it deals with recovery and the minimization of losses due to traumatic events in life. V+ theory has been developed with disasters in mind, but it is based on the notions that have significant meaning in the mental health field. Similar to post-disaster recovery, resilience or the process of mental health recovery requires contributions on multiple levels, including the patient, his/her environment, the healthcare system, and timely access to resources (Tsang et al., 2016; Zakour, 2019). Next, the relationships between the concepts of vulnerability and resilience in V+ theory are very similar to those of internalized stigma and patient well-being/recovery. In particular, self-stigma and mental disease present barriers to resilience and faster recovery from traumatic circumstances.
V+ theory suggests multiple connections between resilience and one’s social environment, which can make it applicable to practice problems dealing with internalized stereotypes. Social capital is among the key resources that support resilience and reduce vulnerability (Zakour, 2019). In a similar manner, modern mental health research demonstrates positive peer contact’s protective role against self-stigma in individuals with severe mental health issues (Li et al., 2020). To some extent, if adapted to the realities of mental health disorders in a successful manner, the theory could inform the creation of a large-scale mental health stigma prevention plan.
Conclusion
In summary, framework evaluation techniques serve a range of purposes, including the assessments of studies’ logical consistency and clarity. The analyzed literature review study exemplifies a well-developed theoretical framework that is, however, expressed in an overly simplified way. V+ theory promotes a systems-level approach to mental health improvement under challenging circumstances, and this and other principles could be applied to barriers to care-seeking, treatment, and recovery, such as self-stigma.
References
Li, X. H., Zhang, T. M., Yau, Y. Y., Wang, Y. Z., Wong, Y. L. I., Yang, L., Tian, X. L., Chan. C. L. W., & Ran, M. S. (2020). Peer-to-peer contact, social support and self-stigma among people with severe mental illness in Hong Kong.International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 1-10. Web.
Tsang, H. W. H., Ching, S. C., Tang, K. H., Lam, H. T., Law, P. Y. Y., & Wan, C. N. (2016). Therapeutic intervention for internalized stigma of severe mental illness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Schizophrenia Research, 173(1-2), 45–53.
Varpio, L., Paradis, E., Uijtdehaage, S., & Young, M. (2020). The distinctions between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework.Academic Medicine, 95(7), 989-994. Web.
Zakour, M. J. (2019). Macro-level interventions in disasters: Theoretical foundations for improving mental health outcomes. Best Practices in Mental Health, 15(2), 16-28.