Monday, December 17, 2018

Stages and Processes of Healthful Change

Virtually all of us seek basic life guidelines whose applications readily promote our health and function. Accordingly, this blog post will describe one approach to helping you in that endeavor.

Although behavioral science has not created any simple, E=mc₂-elegant formulas, it has suggested stages and processes to guide our efforts toward physical and mental health. One of the most well-respected of these is the transtheoretical model of Prochaska, DiClemente, and Norcross (1992).

The Prochaska model attempts to match our healthful lifestyle change interventions to given stages. Five stages have been suggested: precontemplation precedes all of our change efforts; contemplation involves planning to change; preparation has us assembling the resources to act on our healthful intention; action is the period during which we overtly implement our plan; and maintenance is our continuing efforts toward change. Prochaska and his colleagues hoped that their model could be used to guide many health-oriented goals.

The five stages were described in terms of five cognitive-affective processes and five behavioral processes.  The former concerned: gathering information, considering consequences on oneself, experiencing and expressing emotion, evaluating consequences on others, and paying attention to norms of society. The latter included: substituting new behaviors for the old ones,  controlling cues within the environment, rewards to the self and others, taking advantage of social supports, and making a change commitment.  

In theory, every stage could be influenced by the way an individual dealt with the cognitive-affective processes and behavioral processes. Craig S. Rosen (2000) was not convinced, so he set out to test the transtheoretical model to ensure that it could be used to greatest effect.  His research focused on the usefulness of the Prochaska model for persons attempting smoking cessation, diet change, exercise adoption, elimination of substance abuse, and benefit from psychotherapy.

After analyzing forty-seven studies, Rosen concluded that the Prochaska stages worked well across the five targeted health goals.  However, the processes were not the same for all.  Specifically, for smoking cessation, in the early stages of change, cognitive processes were more central than behavioral processes.  For diet change and exercise adoption, the cognitive and behavioral processes worked consistently with each other. And for elimination of substance abuse, and benefit from psychotherapy there was general inconsistency.

Rosen’s research was noteworthy because the Prochaska transtheoretical model is well-respected and frequently employed by health professionals to treat their patients. I, too, regard the model as one that has merit, and that can be used with discretion to help guide healthful lifestyle change. However, the stages do not necessarily proceed smoothly from one to the other, and the processes can assume different value from person to person. My point in writing about the model today is to underscore my perennial advice: You must match any change model to what I call your ego strength—the unique “you” that is a result of interactions among your history, temperament, personality, and environments. Remain open-minded to others’ recommendations, but customize them to fit what you are willing and able to do. In order to perform the customization, tactfully "challenge" whoever is advising you.  That is, you need to let them know at which points their advice seems to align with who you are and where it does not seem to do so. After that, you can carefully observe the advisor's response and decide whether you then have more or less confidence in their recommendations.
    
References

Prochaska, J., DiClemente, C., & Norcross, J. (1992).  In search of how people change:  Applications to addictive behaviors.  American Psychologist 47, 9,1102-1114.

Rosen, C. (2000).  Is the sequencing of change processes by stage consistent across health problems?  A meta-analysis.  Health Psychology, 19, 6, 593-604.  doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-6133.19.6.593 

No comments:

Post a Comment