Ph 587 Group Theory Presentation Rubric Scoring Points Earne

Ph 587group Theory Presentation Rubricareascoringpoints Earnedpurpose

The assignment requires a comprehensive presentation on social cognitive theory as it relates to health behavior, particularly in the context of a chosen behavior or health issue. The presentation should include a brief description of the theory and its behavior, an overview of relevant literature, an explanation of key constructs and determinants, a discussion of the underlying model, and an application of the theory to the chosen behavior through a logic model. The presentation must be between 18 to 20 minutes and encompass the following components:

• Purpose and overview of the theory, including its behavior and the purpose of relevant studies
• Brief literature review regarding behavior and health promotion
• Explanation of constructs and determinants such as knowledge, self-efficacy, outcome expectations, goal formation, and sociostructural factors
• Discussion of the theoretical model, including clear logic and relationships among constructs
• Application of the theory to a specific health behavior, illustrated with one logic model
• Adherence to the time length of 18-20 minutes

Paper For Above instruction

The social cognitive theory (SCT), originally developed by Albert Bandura in 1977, has become a foundational framework in health behavior research and intervention design. It emphasizes the dynamic interplay between personal factors, environmental influences, and behavior itself—a concept known as triadic reciprocal determinism. This theory underscores the importance of observational learning, self-efficacy, and outcome expectations in behavior change processes, making it especially relevant for designing health promotion programs aimed at modifying complex health behaviors.

Fundamentally, SCT consolidates a range of constructs critical to understanding how individuals learn and maintain health behaviors. Knowledge is recognized as a foundational element; however, Bandura (2004) underscores that knowledge alone does not lead to behavior change. Instead, procedural knowledge—knowing how to perform a behavior—is critical, serving as the initial step in health promotion. Understanding the advantages and disadvantages of a health behavior informs motivation and helps individuals assess the value of change.

Self-efficacy, the belief in one's ability to perform a specific behavior, is at the core of SCT. It influences whether an individual initiates and persists in health behaviors, especially under challenging circumstances. Perceived self-efficacy is task-specific and can be improved through mechanisms such as mastery experiences, verbal persuasion, social modeling, and emotional regulation. Interventions targeting self-efficacy tend to be more successful when they enhance physical and emotional states and provide vicarious learning experiences.

Outcome expectations refer to what individuals believe will result from engaging in a health behavior. These expectations, such as perceived benefits or costs, influence motivation significantly. They are shaped by social learning processes and are reinforced by personal reinforcement or lack thereof. Reinforcement can be intrinsic (personal satisfaction) or extrinsic (recognition), and both can strengthen continuance in health behaviors.

Goal formation is an essential component of SCT, especially for complex behaviors like diabetes management. Setting specific, measurable, and achievable sub-goals can facilitate progress and maintain motivation. The process of goal-setting is intertwined with self-efficacy and outcome expectations, creating a cycle that fosters sustained behavior change.

Sociostructural factors, including social determinants of health, support or hinder behavior change. These factors, akin to perceived behavioral control in the Theory of Planned Behavior, influence individuals' capacity and motivation to engage in health behaviors. Understanding and addressing these external influences are vital for effective interventions.

One of the unique aspects of SCT is the concept of reciprocal triadic causation, involving person, environment, and behavior, which highlights how these elements mutually influence each other. For example, an individual’s perception of social support may enhance self-efficacy, leading to increased engagement in health behaviors, which in turn can alter environmental factors.

In practical applications, SCT offers strategies for intervention at different levels of readiness for change. For individuals with high self-efficacy and strong outcome expectations, strategies might focus on maintenance; for those with doubts, foundational elements like knowledge and self-efficacy building are prioritized. The theory’s broad scope allows for comprehensive programs that address initiation, maintenance, and relapse prevention of health behaviors.

Nevertheless, SCT has limitations, including its broadness and difficulty in operationalization. Its assumption that environmental changes directly lead to behavior change may oversimplify the complex emotional and motivational factors involved in health behavior maintenance. Furthermore, the theory's emphasis on cognition might overlook the role of affect and intrinsic motivation, essential for some health behaviors.

Applying SCT to a specific health behavior, such as smoking cessation, entails developing a tailored logic model. The model would focus on enhancing knowledge about smoking risks, building self-efficacy through mastery experiences (e.g., quitting attempts), and modifying environmental influences like social support or access to cessation programs. Interventions could include skills training, motivational interviewing, and community support groups, all aimed at altering constructs outlined by SCT to facilitate sustained quitting.

References

• Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
• Bandura, A. (2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 143–164.
• McAlister, A. L., Perry, C., & Parcel, G. (Eds.). (2008). Genetics and health promotion. Health Education & Behavior.
• Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Viswanath, K. (2015). Health Behavior: Theory, Research, and Practice. Jossey-Bass.
• Craig, C. L., et al. (2003). International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(8), 1381–1395.
• Resnicow, K., et al. (2002). Motivational Interviewing in health promotion and behavioral change. In C. R. Snyder & C. R. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of Positive Psychology.
• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
• Noar, S. M., & Zimmerman, R. S. (2005). Health Behavior Theory and cumulative knowledge regarding health behaviors: Are we moving in the right direction? Health Education Research, 20(3), 275–290.
• Strauss, J. L., et al. (2014). Self-efficacy and health behaviors: A systematic review. Psychology & Health, 29(11), 1370–1384.
• Prochaska, J. O., & DiClemente, C. C. (1983). Stages and processes of self-change of smoking: Toward an integrative model of change. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51(3), 390–395.