Two Key Studies of Risk Factors & Protective Factors (HL IB Psychology)

Key study one: Haslam et al. (2018)

Aim: 

• To investigate the tendency to underestimate the importance of social factors for health

Participants:

• 502 participants from the USA and the UK (56% female; 44% male)

• Age range 18-72 years (mean 36 years)

• A volunteer sample recruited using internet crowd sourcing platforms

• The sample came from different educational backgrounds

• 42% of the sample had an undergraduate degree

Procedure: 

• Participants completed questionnaires containing a range of Likert scale questions on the following topics:

  • perceived determinants of health: participants were asked to rank in importance a range of health factors and say by how many years up to twenty each might increase their life expectancy

  • anti-psychosocial health beliefs: twelve items relating to beliefs about the importance that health professionals should attach to the psychosocial dimensions of health, such as:

    • divorce

    • poverty

    • loneliness

  • right-wing authoritarianism: participants responded to statements such as, ‘People should always comply with the decision of the majority’

  • social dominance orientation: participants responded to statements such as ‘Superior groups should dominate inferior groups’

  • belief in biological essentialism: participants responded to statements such as, ‘Whether someone is one kind of person or another is determined by their biological make-up’ 

  • controlled variables: participants were asked their age, gender, and highest level of education and to respond to questions about their current health status

Results:

• Social factors for health were underestimated when compared to other factors such as biological and psychological factors. 

• The following groups consistently ranked social factors as less important to health than other factors:

  • younger participants 

  • males 

  • those with a lower level of education 

Conclusion:

• Social factors are ignored and under-played as a factor influencing health, especially amongst particular social groups

Evaluation of Haslam et al. (2018)

Strengths

• Using questionnaires with standardised questions and rating scales means that the study can be replicated easily, increasing the reliability of the findings

• The participants came from a wide age range and a variety of backgrounds which makes the findings more generalisable than a narrower demographic would offer

Limitations

• Rating scales may be interpreted subjectively as one person’s idea of what a number represents may not be the same as another person’s idea of that same number

• Questionnaire responses cannot predict how participants will behave, as a participant may rank social support as being unnecessary for health but they may derive benefit from it later

Key study two: Turbin et al. (2006)

Aim: 

• To investigate the interaction between social context and risk and protective factors for health behaviours, in middle school participants from China and the USA

Participants: 

• A sample of 1739 participants from middle schools in and around Beijing, and 1596 participants from middle schools in Colorado, USA

• Samples were deliberately drawn from local urban schools of different socioeconomic statuses

Procedure: 

• This was a longitudinal study wherein participants answered a questionnaire on two different occasions, with a 1-year gap in between 

• The questionnaire measured risk factors and protective factors in five areas:

  • individual behaviour 

  • family context

  • peer group behaviour

  • school context

  • community context

• The questionnaire measured five health-related behaviours, some in only one area and some in more than one:

  • healthy diet

  • regular exercise

  • adequate sleep

  • safety practices - 

    • in the US sample =  frequency of using a seatbelt in a car with a parent and with a friend

    • in the China sample = frequency of waiting for red lights when biking and when walking

  • dental hygiene

Results:

• The largest correlation was found between protective factors at the social level rather than protective factors at the individual level

• Protective factors were more influential than risk factors at a social and individual level

• The above findings suggest that social protective factors increase health through: 

  • modelling healthy behaviour

  • providing controls against unhealthy behaviour

  • a supportive social environment

Conclusion:

• Results suggest that healthy behaviour is more readily fostered by the modelling of such behaviour by family and peers, rather than by individual efforts to control unhealthy behaviour

Exercise is a protective factor for health 

Evaluation of Turbin et al. (2006)

Strengths

• A large-scale longitudinal study of adolescents from two different cultures and varying socio-economic backgrounds increases the reliability of the findings

• The findings can be used to enhance protective factors for adolescent health through promoting adolescent health behaviours and reducing the negative impact of risk

Limitations

• The translation of the questionnaire into Chinese means that some of the terms may have had different meanings in the two samples

• Samples were drawn from local, urban schools in each country, and so the data are not widely generalisable beyond this demographic