The analysis phase: how do you find theory-based explanations for problems? - Chapter 3

In this phase, the outcome variable must first be defined, this is the variable that we want to change. After that, as many explanations as possible are found in the divergent phase. These explanations are linked to relevant social psychological theories. Finally, in the convergent phase, the statements are evaluated for their relevance, validity, and probability of the problem.  

How do you specify the outcome variable?

The first goal in the analysis phase is specifying the outcome variable to clarify the target behaviour for intervention. Ideally, the outcome variable is formulated in terms of the desired state. The literature distinguishes three different psychological variables:

1. Behaviours and behavioural intentions
2. Attitudes and cognitions
3. Emotions or affect

It is preferable to focus on a single outcome variable at first rather than a set of variables. This is because variables can be strongly related to each other, so a change in one variable causes a change in the others. When variables aren’t related, it’s because they have a different ontogenetic history. For this they need various explanations and interventions.

What are requirements for the outcome variable?

The behaviour, attitude, or affect that is the outcome variable, should, to be a useful target of influence, also meet the following three criteria:

• Relevance: it must be relevant to the problem. The outcome variable should logically arise from the problem definition. In an ideal scenario, it should reflect the desired state.
• Specificity: it must be described in specific and concrete terms. In the PATH model, the outcome variable must be described as concretely as possible. This is important because too general an outcome variable makes it difficult to develop an effective intervention program. You then run the risk of influencing aspects of the variable that are not problematic.
• Continuity: it must be described in continuous terms. The variable must be continuous so that it can be described in quantitative terms (more or less than…). Firstly, it makes it easier to generate explanations for the problem and to describe the causal model. Secondly, a quantitative variable also makes it easier to evaluate an intervention program. The state before and the state after the intervention are easy to compare.

How do you generate explanations in the divergent phase?

After specifying the outcome variable, the second task in the analysis phase is to generate as many explanations as possible and identify the relevant causes of the problem. This is the divergent phase. There are a few things to consider in this phase. First, the validity of the statements matters less at this stage. It is more important to ensure that all aspects of the problem are explained. Secondly, the social psychologist should focus on explanations for possible differences in the outcome variable.

There are several methods available to help practitioners generate a list of explanations:

• Free association can be used to look at the problem, creatively examining it from many different angles. Here it is important that as many explanations as possible are initially thought up. Subsequently, the validity is examined, and the most favourable explanations are chosen. Furthermore, finding an explanation in free association can lead to finding another explanation that logically follows from the first. Different types of associations are distinguished:
  • Problem association: simplest form. The psychologist makes as many explanations for the problem as possible by asking himself “why is it a problem”. This focuses solely on the problem.
  • Concept association: looking beyond the problem to come up phenomena that are conceptually like the problem. By using concepts, the psychologist can translate the problem into a more abstract and scientific problem.
  • Taking perspective: taking a perspective sees the problem through the eyes of the people involved in the problem. First, the individuals involved must be identified and then the psychologist must put themselves into the individual’s shoes.
• Explanations can also be derived from empirical techniques such as surveys, interviews, or observations. They are more specific in this phase because they arise from the chosen outcome variable(s). a specific interview method is the “why interview”, which is more detailed than interviews discussed in the problem phase. in the analysis phase, a more systematic observation is sued than in the problem phase. A distinction can be made between observation of others and self-observation (introspection).
  • Observation: SYMLOG can be used as an observational tool to give graphical representation to a group.
  • Introspection: group members may be asked to judge themselves and how they respond to others.
• One could examine the social psychological literature to find explanations. Social psychological theories, usually based on many studies, specify the possible causes of behaviour, such as aggression, altruism, leadership, status, conformity, and prejudice. The two methods of explanation generation, taking association and perspective, often give an idea of which theories are relevant and which are not. Remember, in the analysis phase, these theories are mainly used as a heuristic to make a causal explanatory model. In the test phase, the theories are examined more thoroughly. There are three strategies for finding explanations from social psychological literature:
  •  The thematic (topical) strategy: this approach finds what has been written in the literature on a particular topic. In many cases, there are studies within the psychological literature that are directly related to the problem.
  • Conceptual strategy: this approach reformulates the problem on a more conceptual level to find links with relevant social psychological phenomena and theories.
  • General theory strategy: the thematic and conceptual strategies can be characterized as inductive in that one moves ‘bottom-up’, from problem to explanation. The general theory strategy is deductive, it moves ‘top-down’ from a general theory that at first glance doesn’t seem very relevant to the problem. However, they have a wide range of implications across a range of problems. For example, it’s good to use this strategy for a relatively new problem.

How do you reduce the number of explanations in the convergent phase?

The aim of the divergent phase is producing as may explanations as possible. Conversely, in the convergent phase, the number of explanations is drastically reduced so that only the most plausible explanations remain. There are three steps during this phase:

1. First, reduce the number of explanations/statements by getting rid of irrelevant and redundant explanations.
2. During the second step, the theoretical validity of each statement is checked.
3. Lastly, the remaining explanations are checked to see if they are responsible for the problem.