An essay on a contemporary theory or model on changing behaviour.
focused on
improving health at work.
OSONDU ADAKU JULIET
USER16951579
CURRENT PERSPECTIVE IN PSYCHOLOGY
LJMU 7500 PSYSCI 48451
25/11/2023
USER16951579
One of the most widely used models in health promotion is social cognitive
theory. it addresses both underlying determinants of health behavior and the
methods of promoting change and was based on the interaction between
individual and environment. It focuses on the way in which an environment
shapes behavior. Human health is a social matter, not just an individual one. A
comprehensive approach to health promotion also requires changing the practices of
social systems that have widespread effects on human health.
Social cognitive theory specifies a core set of determinants, the mechanism through
which they work, and the optimal ways of translating this knowledge into effective
health practices. The core determinants include knowledge of health risks and
benefits of different health practices, perceived self-efficacy that one can exercise
control over one’s health habits, outcome expectations about the expected costs and
benefits for different health habits, the health goals people set for themselves and
the concrete plans and strategies for realizing them, and the perceived facilitators
and social and structural impediments to the changes they seek. Knowledge of
health risks and benefits creates the precondition for change. If people lack
knowledge about how their lifestyle habits affect their health, they have little reason
to put themselves through the travail of changing the detrimental habits they enjoy.
But additional self-influences are needed for most people to overcome the
impediments to adopting new lifestyle habits and maintaining them. Beliefs of
personal efficacy play a central role in personal change. This focal belief is the
foundation of human motivation and action. Unless people believe they can produce
desired effects by their actions, they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the
face of difficulties. Whatever other factors may serve as guides and motivators, they
are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to produce desired changes by
one’s actions.
Health behavior is also affected by the outcomes people expect their actions to
produce. The outcome expectations take several forms. The physical outcomes
include the pleasurable and aversion effects of the behavior and the accompanying
material losses and benefits. this Behavior is also partly regulated by the social
reactions it evokes. The social approval and disapproval the behavior produces in
one’s interpersonal relationships is the second major class of outcomes. This third
USER16951579
set of outcomes concerns the positive and negative self-evaluative reactions to one’s
health behavior and health status. People adopt personal standards and regulate
their behavior by their self-evaluative reactions. They do things that give them self-
satisfaction and self-worth and refrain from behaving in ways that breed self-
dissatisfaction. Motivation is enhanced by helping people to see how habit changes
are in their self-interest and the broader goals they value highly. The workplace is an
important setting for health protection, health promotion and disease prevention
programs. The use of effective workplace programs and policies can reduce health
risks and improve the quality of life for American workers. To improve the health of
their employees, businesses can create a wellness culture that is employee-
centered; provides supportive environments where safety is ensured and health can
emerge, and provides access and opportunities for their employers to engage in a
variety of workplace health programs.
Workplace health programs refer to a coordinated and comprehensive set of
strategies which include programs, policies, benefits, environmental supports, and
links to the surrounding community designed to meet the health and safety needs of
all employees. Examples of workplace health program components and strategies
include, Health education classes, Access to local fitness facilities, Company policies
that promote healthy behaviors such as a tobacco-free campus policy, Employee
health insurance coverage for appropriate preventive screenings, A healthy work
environment created through actions such as making healthy foods available and
accessible through vending machines or cafeterias, a work environment free of
recognized health and safety threats with a means to identify and address new
problems as they arise. Workplace health programs can lead to change at both the
employee and the organization levels. For employees, workplace health programs
have the potential to impact an employee’s health, such as their health behaviors;
health risks for disease; and current health status. For organizations, workplace
health programs have the potential to impact areas such as health care costs,
absenteeism, productivity, recruitment/retention, culture and employee morale. A
coordinated approach to workplace health promotion results in a planned, organized,
and comprehensive set of programs, policies, benefits, and environmental supports
designed to meet the health and safety needs of all employees. Workplace health
USER16951579
promotion programs are more likely to be successful if occupational safety and
health is considered in their design and execution. A growing body of evidence
indicates that workplace-based interventions that take coordinated, planned, or
integrated approaches to reducing health threats to workers both in and out of work
are more effective than traditional isolated programs.
The systematic process of building a workplace health promotion program
emphasizes four main steps which include A successful workplace health program,
which is one that is targeted to the specific employee population, suiting the
worksite, employee needs, and personal and organizational health goals. This
information can be gained through the first step in the process – a workplace health
assessment. An assessment should aim to capture a picture of the many factors that
influence employee health including individual level factors such as lifestyle choices,
the work environment and the organizational level. This assessment can take place
informally through conversations, a call for input/opinions, or more formally by using
instruments such as an employee health survey or environmental audit. Both
current health issues as well as employee interests should be considered when
prioritizing program and policy interventions as well as evaluating and making
improvements to the workplace health program on an ongoing basis. Involving
employees from the beginning will reinforce the shared responsibility and
commitment the employee and the organization have to employee health, and the
overall success of the workplace health program. The assessment module provides
guidelines, tools, and resources for conducting a workplace health assessment.
Next, a careful planning stage should precede any implementation of workplace health
programs, policies, benefits or environmental supports. The overall program requires a
basic governance structure or infrastructure to administer and manage health promotion
activities which can be initiated during the planning phase and recognizes the size and
scope of each step may be influenced by factors such as the company’s size, sector, or
geographic location. The enterprise governance structure provides the strategic direction,
leadership, and organization necessary to rationalize the program elements.
Organizational strategies provide the infrastructure to ensure program objectives are
USER16951579
achieved, employee health risks are appropriately managed, and the company’s
resources are used responsibility.
The third process is implementing the program. Most employers, when they think about
improving worker health, think of actions individuals can take. Losing weight, quitting
smoking, and exercising more are all examples of individual actions that can result in
better health. It is important to realize that improving health requires a broad perspective
that also includes the environments in which people work, live, and play. A person’s
health is a result of both individual actions and the context or environment within which
those actions are taken. Employers and employees have many opportunities to influence
the work environment to promote health and prevent disease. Changing the environment
affects large groups of workers simultaneously and makes adopting healthy behaviors
much easier if there are supportive workplace norms and policies.
The fourth step is to determine impart through evaluation. Lastly, work places should
plan to evaluate the programs, policies, benefits, or environmental supports
implemented. It is important to assess how well the workplace health program can be
sustained over time, how it is received by employees and management, and its return on
investment (ROI). The evaluation should focus on questions that are relevant, salient,
and useful to those who will use the findings and that the evaluation process feeds into a
continuous quality improvement loop to improve and strengthen existing activities;
identify potential gaps in current offerings; and describe the efficiency and effectiveness
of the resources invested. The evaluation module provides general and topic specific
guidelines, tools, and resources for evaluating the program’s efforts.
USER16951579
REFERENCES
1. Bandura A:Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York, Freeman, 1997.
2. Bandura A: Social cognitive theory in cultural context. J Appl Psychol51:269-290,
2002.
3. Bandura A: Social cognitive theory of mass communications, in Bryant J, Zillman
D (eds.): Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (2nd ed.). Hillsdale,
NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum,2001, pp. 121-153.
4. Bandura A: Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annu Rev
Psychol52:1-26. PaloAlto, CA, Annual Reviews Inc., 2001.
5. Bandura A: Psychological aspects of prognostic judgments, in Evans RW,Baskin
DS, Yatsu FM(eds.): Prognosis of Neurological Disorders(2nd ed.). New York,
Oxford University Press,2000, pp. 11-27.
6. Dzewaltowski DA, Noble JM, Shaw JM: Physical activity participation: Social
cognitive theory versus the theories of reasoned action and planned behavior.J
Sport Exerc Psychol12:388-405,1990.
7. Hunt MK, Lederman R, Stoddard AM, LaMontagne AD, McLellan D, Combe C, et
al. Process evaluation of an integrated health promotion/occupational health
model in Well-Works-2. Health Education & Behavior.2005;32(1):10–26.
8. Maibach E, Flora J, Nass C: Changes in self-efficacy and health behavior in
response to a minimal contact community health campaign. Health Commun3:1-
15, 1991.
USER16951579
9. Meas S, Verhoeven C, Kittel F, Scholten H. Effects of a Dutch worksite wellness-
health program: the Brabantia project. Am J Pub Health.1998;88:1037–1041.
10. Rimal RN: Closing the knowledge-behavior gap in health promotion: The
mediating role of self-efficacy.Health Commun12:219-237, 2000.
11. Rimal RN: Perceived risk and self-efficacy as motivators: Understanding
individuals’ long-term use of health information.J Communic8:633-654, 2001.
12. Sorensen G, Stoddard A, LaMontagne A, Emmons K, Hunt M, Youngstrom R, et
al. A comprehensive worksite cancer prevention intervention: behavior change
results from a randomized controlled trial in manufacturing worksites (United
States). Cancer Causes Control.2002;13:493–502.
13. Sorensen G, Barbeau EM, Stoddard AM, Hunt MK, Kaphingst K, Wallace L.
Promoting behavior change among working-class, multi-ethnic workers: results of
the Healthy Directions — Small Business Study. Am J Pub Health.
2005;95(8):1389–1395.
USER16951579
