Contextualism and the Development of Effective Prevention Practices
Abstract
Widespread and effective implementation of research-based prevention practices will be facilitated by the explicit adoption of a functional contextualist framework for prevention research. Such a framework has as its central goal predicting and influencing behavior and cultural practices. Research within this framework is evaluated in terms of its ability to contribute to that goal. As a result, it contributes directly to the ultimate goals of prevention science-affecting the incidence and prevalence of problems in populations. The approach contrasts with the mechanist framework, which is implicit in much behavioral science research. The mechanist framework has as its truth criterion the predictive verification of models of the interrelationships among variables. Such models can-but need not-identify manipulable variables that can be exploited to affect problems of interest. Such models require the inclusion of multiple cases for testing and this requirement may impede the tendency of scientists to work with a single school or community. Functional contextualism is suited to the study of the individual case. It provides a framework within which researchers can more readily collaborate with practitioners in the development and further evaluation of practices within the settings where practitioners will ultimately use those practices.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Prevention efforts can be enhanced by focusing on contextual factors that influence behavioral outcomes and provider practices.
“Prevention efforts can be enhanced by focusing on contextual factors that influence behavioral outcomes and provider practices (Biglan 2004).”
From Intervening at the Setting Level to Prevent Behavioral Incidents in Residential Child Care: Efficacy of the CARE Program Model (2016) · cites this paper as Biglan 2004
Cites
Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework.
Glasgow, R. E., Vogt, T. M., & Boles, S. M. (1999) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.89.9.1322 · Cited by 7,217 · see citing works
The operational analysis of psychological terms.
Skinner, B. F. (1945) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0062535 · Cited by 1,262 · see citing works
Mentalism, Behavior-Behavior Relations, and a Behavior-Analytic View of the Purposes of Science
Hayes, S. C., & Brownstein, A. J. (1986) · The Behavior Analyst · doi:10.1007/bf03391944 · Cited by 371 · see citing works
Biglan, A., & Hayes, S. C. (1996) · Applied and Preventive Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0962-1849(96)80026-6 · Cited by 234 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Izzo, C. V., Smith, E. G., Holden, M. J., Norton, C. I., Nunno, M. A., & Sellers, D. E. (2016) · Prevention Science · doi:10.1007/s11121-016-0649-0 · Cited by 56 · see citing works
- Authors
- Biglan, A.
- Affiliations
- Oregon Research Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Biglan, Anthony
- ORCID
- Biglan, Anthony
- Venue
- Prevention Science
- Published
- 2004-03
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 15-21
- ISSN
- 1389-4986 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-6695
- OpenAlex
- W2109007492
- Cited by
- 60
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 7.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Prevention Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › General Psychology › Academic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
- Keywords
- functional contextualism, prevention research, behavior prediction, cultural practices, research-practice collaboration, single case study
- MeSH terms
- Preventive Health Services, School Health Services, United States, Program Development, Models, Organizational
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review