Our interventions in SBCC should be grounded in theory. Many theories have been translated into models and frameworks to guide development communication work over the years.
Although some people see theories as abstract and removed from everyday life, theories provide a set of conceptual tools that allow us to design or improve SBCC programs and strategies. We emphasize theories that help us to predict and influence individual and social behavior. We do so because most program planners are interested in change processes and want to know which strategies and approaches are most likely to lead to a program's desired outcomes.
There are two main types of theories that serve different purposes:
Descriptive theories are meant to describe behavior and are very good at telling us what the factual truths, moral norms, or group identities of a community are. Descriptive theories are great for telling us what is happening in a community, but they do not necessarily emphasize how to promote change.
Prescriptive theories are designed to tell us what the theorists think the best possible world would look like. They are great to help analyze a situation. The trouble with prescriptive theories is that they can be difficult to apply to practical problems and the "real world" because they look at what should be done rather than what actually can be done.
The most common groups of theories used to guide SBCC interventions are listed and defined on the course theory page. We recommend you examine the theory page to get a sample of the theories that contribute to SBCC. You will refer to these theories throughout the five steps of C-Planning.
Theories and models tend to explain human behavior on one of three levels of change – Individual level, Interpersonal level, and Community level. Below are three categories that we'll come back to later in this course.
Individual Change Level
Individual behavior change theories focus on people's knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs, as well as any other real, perceived, or psychological barriers or facilitators to changing individual behavior. When we do social and behavior change work at the individual level, we are trying to change individual behaviors by influencing those factors among members of the intended audience.
Some of the more commonly used individual level behavior change theories include:
The Health Belief Model
The Theory of Reasoned Action/Theory of Planned Behavior
The Stages of Change/Transtheoretical Model
Let's take a look at how one of these theories, the Stages of Change Theory, is conceptualized:
The Stages of Change Theory is conceptualized as a five-stage process related to a person's readiness to change: a) pre-contemplation, b) contemplation, c) preparation, d) action, and e) maintenance. People progress through these stages at varying rates, often moving back and forth along the continuum a number of times before attaining the goal of maintenance. When applying this theory, you may want to think about: Where is your audience with respect to the desired action? What information or messages do they need at that stage?
Interpersonal Change Level
These theories acknowledge the interaction and dialogue that occur between individuals and explore how they can affect behavior change. Individuals inevitably interact with one another (interpersonal communication), communicate in group settings (community-level communication), and are exposed to interpersonal and group interaction via mass mediated communication channels. Individual, and interpersonal, as well as community-level theories of change complement one another and can be used in a coordinated fashion given the inter-related nature of the different levels of communication.
One of the most commonly used interpersonal-level theories of change is Social Learning Theory (also called social cognitive theory).
Let's take a look at how social learning theory is conceptualized:
The Theory of Principles of Social Learning posits that people learn how to behave by: 1) observing the actions of others, 2) observing the apparent consequences of those actions, 3) checking those consequences for their own life, and 4) rehearsing, then trying out those actions themselves. A communication program focused on this theory would build on modeling desired behaviors by leaders, gate keepers and key individuals in the community. A key concept to measure would also be the individual's level of self-efficacy: to what degree do people believe that they have the ability to achieve the desired results by their own actions?
Community Change Level
Community-level theories recognize that individuals do not exist in isolation: they interact with family members and peer groups, and they exist and function within a larger community and social system. We can define "community" as a geographical designation, such as a neighborhood or village. We can also use the term "community" to describe affinity groups, such as members of the same religious group, speakers of the same local dialect or a "community" of local high school parents.
Regardless of whether membership in a community is determined by geography or by affinity, theories that attempt to explain and/or predict behavior at this level are concerned with groups that are larger than the individual and the interpersonal level. Community-level theories of behavior change include but are not limited to concepts related to the psychological characteristics of the individual. Rather, community-level concepts tend to be located in the cultural and social realms.
Commonly used community-level behaviour change theories and models include diffusion of innovations, and the socio-ecological model of change:
Let's take a look at how diffusion of innovations theory is conceptualized:
Diffusion of Innovations Theory describes how new ideas and practices (innovations) are spread through social networks over time. This spread depends on the perceived characteristics of the innovation and the characteristics of the social network. Research would look at how existing social networks function. How connected are different networks? How large are the different networks? Who are the leaders in those networks? Who are the innovators in those networks? But also it will be important to find out what the target population thinks of these new ideas and behaviors, and include messages into programs that address any concerns about the innovation. Read this description of social network theories.
These theories lie along a spectrum from individual to social. This unit introduces you to the most commonly used theories and models that emphasize different levels of individual and social levels of change, including the holistic Socio-Ecological model.
It is important to understand that 1) there are a wide range of theories and models that you can draw upon, and 2) theories can help you more effectively design your strategies, and guide your monitoring and evaluation process. We later provide a comprehensive list of different types of theories, with specific information about levels of change, and key concepts.
emphasis of core theories
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, you will be able to:
Describe the value and limitations of various theories and models and how they have influenced past/current projects.
Apply SBCC theories to your SBCC projects.
Understand the Socio-Ecological Model for Change.
back to top CHALLENGE As indicated on the Module home page, the Challenge is the central position or issue to be submitted to the discussion, often presented as a real-life scenario.
Before we introduce you to the challenge in this unit, it is important that you become familiar with (or refresh your memory on) some key concepts that explain the socio-ecological model (characteristic #2 of an SBCC Framework).
Over the years, there has been a shift in thinking about human behavior. For instance, early in the HIV/AIDS epidemic, we largely believed that behavior change would come from simply giving correct information about transmission and prevention. This proved to be naïve and wrong. Work in social and behavior change communication has increasingly acknowledged four key facts about human behavior:
People make meaning of information based on their own context
Culture and networks influence people’s behavior
People can’t always control the issues that create their behavior
People's decision-making is based on more than health and well-being - there are many other factors that may influence their decisions.
SBCC uses a socioecological model (characteristic #2 of an SBCC framework) which examines several levels of influence to find the "tipping point" for change. This model, applied throughout this course, is a combination of ecological models and psychosocial factors that will assist you in your analysis and planning.
This model shifts our conceptual thinking about social conditions and behavior change separately to a more holistic level. A Socio-Ecological Model for Change views individual behavior as a product of multiple, overlapping social and environmental influences. It shows how an individual (self) is influenced by family, peers, and community. It also shows other "rings of influence" on the individual, all of which can influence change. In addition, the model implies that programs might need to look beyond individual change and aim to influence the social context such as the National Enabling Environment and other levels of analysis. The model also underscores the need to expand beyond ad hoc interventions to a coordinated social movement for change over time.
Socio-Ecological Model
This model (please see the graphic to the right) has two parts:
Levels of analysis are represented by the rings. The rings represent both domains of influence as well as the people representing them at each level.
Crosscutting factors in the triangle influence each of the actors in the rings.
The levels of analysis (represented by the rings) are:
The individual "self" most affected by the issue.
Direct "influencers" are represented by two rings: One includes partners, family, and peers.
The other includes local community (members and leaders), services, products and providers associated with them. All of them may shape community and gender norms, access to and demand for community resources and existing services.
Indirect influences which make up the outer enabling environment. Components of this ring may facilitate or hinder change and include: government policies and regulations, political forces, prevailing economic conditions, the private sector, religion, technology and the natural environment. Actors in this ring, such as national government, business, faith and movement leaders, are often intended audiences for advocacy and social mobilization activities
Each level and the actors in it are influenced by several cross cutting factors which SBCC interventions may be able to modify to generate change. These factors may act in isolation or in combination. To help identify these factors we put them into four large categories: information, motivation, ability to act, and norms.
People need information that is timely, accessible, and relevant. When looking at information consider the level of knowledge held by that person or group, e.g., about modern contraceptives and their side effects. With such information, some individuals, groups, or communities may be empowered to act. For most people, however, information is not enough to change.
They require motivation often represented by attitudes and beliefs about the issues they are trying to change, e.g., attitudes towards condom use or beliefs about the benefit of Family Planning. Motivation can be affected by SBCC through effective counseling, peer education, entertaining radio, or TV programs. If done well, such communication can foster individual attitudinal and behavioral change, as well as social norm change.
However, even motivation may not be enough. For instance, few women and girls in the countries hardest hit by HIV and AIDS have power in negotiating the time and conditions for having sex, including the use of condoms. Or they may lack the funds to buy condoms. They need the ability to act in particular circumstances that pose a threat. Look at the actual skills and efficacy of the actors:
Skills include psychosocial life skills: problem-solving, decision-making, negotiation, critical and creative thinking, interpersonal communication, and other relationship skills, such as empathy.
Efficacy looks at the confidence of individuals (self-efficacy) and groups in their own skills to affect change.
Access includes financial and geographical issues such as access to services, ability to buy products, or transport issues.
Finally, norms — as expressed in perceived norms, sociocultural, and gender norms have considerable influence. Norms reflect the values of the group and specify those actions that are expected of the individual by its surrounding society. Perceived norms are those that an individual believes others are holding and therefore are expected of him or herself. Sociocultural norms are those that the community as a whole is following because of social status or cultural conventions. Gender norms shape the society's view on what is expected of males and females.
It is critically important to keep in mind that the Socio-Ecological Model (SEM) is based on existing theories/approaches from several disciplines including political science, sociology, psychology and communication. Through a synthesis of the information included in these theories and approaches, the socio-ecological model proposes several levels of influence to find effective "tipping points" for change. A tipping point can be a naturally occurring event (such as an earthquake) or a strong determinant such as political will that can provide the critical mass or final energy to "tip over" a situation to change. The term is found in sociology, economics, and epidemiology to describe how momentum builds up to a point where change becomes unstoppable. Tipping points can be important to governments, oppositions, or social movements to unite collectively and with sufficient power behind a certain goal. C-Change developed a table to illustrative the theoretical base of its Socio-Ecological Model and how that relates to finding tipping points for change. Please refer to this table that summarizes key theories that inform the SEM. You will have to draw on it for this unit's final assignment.
Table: The Theoretical Base of the Socio-Ecological Model
Graphic: The Theoretical Base of the Socio-Ecological Model
Challenge Assignment
For your challenge, look at (all the rings and the triangle) of the socio-ecological model and consider your current projects. How do your current projects touch on the multiple rings in the model? Are there rings that you have not considered? What are the likely effects of this? Are there rings to which you have given too much emphasis? What are the likely effects of this? What roles do values, norms, attitudes, and beliefs listed in the triangle play?
Please post your response in the discussion section of this unit.
You'll find a link to discussion posts for the challenge at the bottom of the page.
ACTIVITIES We would like you to begin thinking about how to address multiple levels of change. The next set of activities will help you work on this process.
Look at the two video scenarios about Thandi and Joe presented below.
OPTIONAL discussion questions:
For ONE of the scenarios above address ONE of the following questions in the discussion for this unit:
Is change needed? If so, what kind of change? Identify the policy, norms, beliefs, or behaviors that need to be changed.
What can social and behavior change communicators say or do to help Thandi and Joe change?
Following the socio-ecological model, identify various factors/levels of influence that you would need to address in order to make a difference in the issue affecting Thandi and Joe.
Following the socio-ecological model, identify resources at each level (self/individual, family, community, socio-politico-economic environment) that you could harness in order to help Thandi and Joe change.
You'll find a link to discussion posts for this unit at the bottom of the page.
Read at least TWO of the Following (save the rest for later, if you'd like - but they're all good!):
Family Health International (1996). Behavior Change: A Summary of 4 Major Theories here:
Answer ONE (or more, if you choose) of the following questions:
Which theories or models have you used in your projects? What has been useful about them? What has been less useful?
From the table on theories that inform the SEM (See link in "challenge" section, labelled: "The Theoretical Base of the Socio-Ecological Model," please select one or more theoretical models and discuss how it has been or might be (in the future) useful for your project. (And explain why you think it has been or might be useful in the future).
In your opinion, what is the value (or lack of value), of the socio-ecological model? Does it add anything? Is it beneficial?
Please submit your response to the discussion area below and please put the number of the question you are answering at the beginning of your discussion post.
Introduction | Challenge | Activities | Reflection
INTRODUCTION
Our interventions in SBCC should be grounded in theory. Many theories have been translated into models and frameworks to guide development communication work over the years.
Although some people see theories as abstract and removed from everyday life, theories provide a set of conceptual tools that allow us to design or improve SBCC programs and strategies. We emphasize theories that help us to predict and influence individual and social behavior. We do so because most program planners are interested in change processes and want to know which strategies and approaches are most likely to lead to a program's desired outcomes.
There are two main types of theories that serve different purposes:
The most common groups of theories used to guide SBCC interventions are listed and defined on the course theory page. We recommend you examine the theory page to get a sample of the theories that contribute to SBCC. You will refer to these theories throughout the five steps of C-Planning.
Theories and models tend to explain human behavior on one of three levels of change – Individual level, Interpersonal level, and Community level. Below are three categories that we'll come back to later in this course.
Individual Change Level
Individual behavior change theories focus on people's knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs, as well as any other real, perceived, or psychological barriers or facilitators to changing individual behavior. When we do social and behavior change work at the individual level, we are trying to change individual behaviors by influencing those factors among members of the intended audience.
Some of the more commonly used individual level behavior change theories include:
Let's take a look at how one of these theories, the Stages of Change Theory, is conceptualized:
The Stages of Change Theory is conceptualized as a five-stage process related to a person's readiness to change: a) pre-contemplation, b) contemplation, c) preparation, d) action, and e) maintenance. People progress through these stages at varying rates, often moving back and forth along the continuum a number of times before attaining the goal of maintenance. When applying this theory, you may want to think about: Where is your audience with respect to the desired action? What information or messages do they need at that stage?
Interpersonal Change Level
These theories acknowledge the interaction and dialogue that occur between individuals and explore how they can affect behavior change. Individuals inevitably interact with one another (interpersonal communication), communicate in group settings (community-level communication), and are exposed to interpersonal and group interaction via mass mediated communication channels. Individual, and interpersonal, as well as community-level theories of change complement one another and can be used in a coordinated fashion given the inter-related nature of the different levels of communication.
One of the most commonly used interpersonal-level theories of change is Social Learning Theory (also called social cognitive theory).
Let's take a look at how social learning theory is conceptualized:
The Theory of Principles of Social Learning posits that people learn how to behave by: 1) observing the actions of others, 2) observing the apparent consequences of those actions, 3) checking those consequences for their own life, and 4) rehearsing, then trying out those actions themselves. A communication program focused on this theory would build on modeling desired behaviors by leaders, gate keepers and key individuals in the community. A key concept to measure would also be the individual's level of self-efficacy: to what degree do people believe that they have the ability to achieve the desired results by their own actions?
Community Change Level
Community-level theories recognize that individuals do not exist in isolation: they interact with family members and peer groups, and they exist and function within a larger community and social system. We can define "community" as a geographical designation, such as a neighborhood or village. We can also use the term "community" to describe affinity groups, such as members of the same religious group, speakers of the same local dialect or a "community" of local high school parents.
Regardless of whether membership in a community is determined by geography or by affinity, theories that attempt to explain and/or predict behavior at this level are concerned with groups that are larger than the individual and the interpersonal level. Community-level theories of behavior change include but are not limited to concepts related to the psychological characteristics of the individual. Rather, community-level concepts tend to be located in the cultural and social realms.
Commonly used community-level behaviour change theories and models include diffusion of innovations, and the socio-ecological model of change:
Let's take a look at how diffusion of innovations theory is conceptualized:
These theories lie along a spectrum from individual to social. This unit introduces you to the most commonly used theories and models that emphasize different levels of individual and social levels of change, including the holistic Socio-Ecological model.
It is important to understand that 1) there are a wide range of theories and models that you can draw upon, and 2) theories can help you more effectively design your strategies, and guide your monitoring and evaluation process. We later provide a comprehensive list of different types of theories, with specific information about levels of change, and key concepts.
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this unit, you will be able to:
back to top
CHALLENGE
As indicated on the Module home page, the Challenge is the central position or issue to be submitted to the discussion, often presented as a real-life scenario.
Before we introduce you to the challenge in this unit, it is important that you become familiar with (or refresh your memory on) some key concepts that explain the socio-ecological model (characteristic #2 of an SBCC Framework).
Over the years, there has been a shift in thinking about human behavior. For instance, early in the HIV/AIDS epidemic, we largely believed that behavior change would come from simply giving correct information about transmission and prevention. This proved to be naïve and wrong. Work in social and behavior change communication has increasingly acknowledged four key facts about human behavior:
SBCC uses a socioecological model (characteristic #2 of an SBCC framework) which examines several levels of influence to find the "tipping point" for change. This model, applied throughout this course, is a combination of ecological models and psychosocial factors that will assist you in your analysis and planning.
This model shifts our conceptual thinking about social conditions and behavior change separately to a more holistic level. A Socio-Ecological Model for Change views individual behavior as a product of multiple, overlapping social and environmental influences. It shows how an individual (self) is influenced by family, peers, and community. It also shows other "rings of influence" on the individual, all of which can influence change. In addition, the model implies that programs might need to look beyond individual change and aim to influence the social context such as the National Enabling Environment and other levels of analysis. The model also underscores the need to expand beyond ad hoc interventions to a coordinated social movement for change over time.
This model (please see the graphic to the right) has two parts:
The levels of analysis (represented by the rings) are:
Each level and the actors in it are influenced by several cross cutting factors which SBCC interventions may be able to modify to generate change. These factors may act in isolation or in combination. To help identify these factors we put them into four large categories: information, motivation, ability to act, and norms.
People need information that is timely, accessible, and relevant. When looking at information consider the level of knowledge held by that person or group, e.g., about modern contraceptives and their side effects. With such information, some individuals, groups, or communities may be empowered to act. For most people, however, information is not enough to change.
They require motivation often represented by attitudes and beliefs about the issues they are trying to change, e.g., attitudes towards condom use or beliefs about the benefit of Family Planning. Motivation can be affected by SBCC through effective counseling, peer education, entertaining radio, or TV programs. If done well, such communication can foster individual attitudinal and behavioral change, as well as social norm change.
However, even motivation may not be enough. For instance, few women and girls in the countries hardest hit by HIV and AIDS have power in negotiating the time and conditions for having sex, including the use of condoms. Or they may lack the funds to buy condoms. They need the ability to act in particular circumstances that pose a threat. Look at the actual skills and efficacy of the actors:
Finally, norms — as expressed in perceived norms, sociocultural, and gender norms have considerable influence. Norms reflect the values of the group and specify those actions that are expected of the individual by its surrounding society. Perceived norms are those that an individual believes others are holding and therefore are expected of him or herself. Sociocultural norms are those that the community as a whole is following because of social status or cultural conventions. Gender norms shape the society's view on what is expected of males and females.
It is critically important to keep in mind that the Socio-Ecological Model (SEM) is based on existing theories/approaches from several disciplines including political science, sociology, psychology and communication. Through a synthesis of the information included in these theories and approaches, the socio-ecological model proposes several levels of influence to find effective "tipping points" for change. A tipping point can be a naturally occurring event (such as an earthquake) or a strong determinant such as political will that can provide the critical mass or final energy to "tip over" a situation to change. The term is found in sociology, economics, and epidemiology to describe how momentum builds up to a point where change becomes unstoppable. Tipping points can be important to governments, oppositions, or social movements to unite collectively and with sufficient power behind a certain goal. C-Change developed a table to illustrative the theoretical base of its Socio-Ecological Model and how that relates to finding tipping points for change. Please refer to this table that summarizes key theories that inform the SEM. You will have to draw on it for this unit's final assignment.
Table: The Theoretical Base of the Socio-Ecological Model
Graphic: The Theoretical Base of the Socio-Ecological Model
Challenge Assignment
For your challenge, look at (all the rings and the triangle) of the socio-ecological model and consider your current projects. How do your current projects touch on the multiple rings in the model? Are there rings that you have not considered? What are the likely effects of this? Are there rings to which you have given too much emphasis? What are the likely effects of this? What roles do values, norms, attitudes, and beliefs listed in the triangle play?
Please post your response in the discussion section of this unit.
You'll find a link to discussion posts for the challenge at the bottom of the page.
back to top
ACTIVITIES
We would like you to begin thinking about how to address multiple levels of change. The next set of activities will help you work on this process.
Look at the two video scenarios about Thandi and Joe presented below.
OPTIONAL discussion questions:
For ONE of the scenarios above address ONE of the following questions in the discussion for this unit:
You'll find a link to discussion posts for this unit at the bottom of the page.
Read at least TWO of the Following (save the rest for later, if you'd like - but they're all good!):
REFLECTION
Assignment
Answer ONE (or more, if you choose) of the following questions:
Please submit your response to the discussion area below and please put the number of the question you are answering at the beginning of your discussion post.
back to top
back to top