Mapping Research

        Public health educators have different theories and models that explain how an individual changes certain behaviors to become healthy.  Many of these theories and models have certain constructs that help understand the reasoning behind why they change or not.  Although external factors tend to play a small role in the overall scheme of “being healthy”, it certainly effects numerous people in changing a bad behavior.  One of the biggest external factors that public health as a whole faces, is the environment.  If the environment is not suitable then the risk of chronic illness increases and healthy behaviors decrease.  Recently, Mapping or Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been used within the field of public health to determine how to change the environment so the population can indeed change their behaviors.

             The first article recognizes that the environment does in fact support healthy behaviors, but focuses more on the exposure to contaminants, duration of exposure time, and hazards.  The researchers use The Environmental Public Health Tracking Network (EPHTN) to follow the variables listed above in certain communities.  This mapping program allows the researchers to make correlations between health illnesses and geographic locations of the environment by plotting points on a map using secondary data.  From these points the authors could determine any correlations between health behaviors and the environment.  According to Mather et al. (2004) using such mapping programs like GIS has provided researchers a method to link variables within the environment, but they still need additional efforts to confirm the links. 

            The second article also realized that the environment plays a key factor, but focused more on socio-economic status and the safety of the neighborhood for physical activity.  The researchers used GIS to determine community boundaries, schools, public recreation facilities, and numerous other factors that may affect healthy behaviors.  Like many problems, socio-economic status can link to numerous problems besides a poor health, but according to Wilson, Kirtland, Ainsworth, and Addy (2004) GIS determined that lower socio-economic environments do in fact reduce the chances of a person having access to facilities and user friendly communities.  This study can help future researchers in public health fixed communities and make them more accessible to its members. 

            The last article actually is different because the authors compare two different built environments, GIS and Senior Walking Environmental Tool (SWEAT) to set the parameters of the communities.   The interesting part in this article was the variables needed to sustain an environment where community members would actually use it.  Some variables include pleasantness, safety/comfort, accessibility, and maintenance.  All of those affect the usage and ultimately the health of the community.  The built environments of both GIS and SWEAT still had healthy effects on the community.  “This study supports prior research that identified built environment correlates of walking for exercise or transportation and adds to the body of research by proposing a method of creating conceptually meaningful measures of neighborhood walkability from objective, micro scale data” (Keast, Carlson, Chapman, & Michael, 2010).  In other words using a mapping application for walkability of a built environment are effective measures to use when creating such environment. 

            Based off of the three articles there are numerous uses for GIS within the classroom.  First off, an instructor could create real-life assignments where students use GIS in mapping out a community and relationship it has to health.  It could be broken up into 2 parts, where the first part allows the student to see any external factors that may complicate usage (traffic accidents, deaths, sewage plant, sidewalks etc.).  The second part could be to use the analysis and build the environment for a community.  Not only is this public health, but it’s a service project as well.  Other uses for mapping could be finding increased pockets of infectious diseases.  The students would get a data set and run maps to see area that may have been infected with disease (HIV/AIDS, Chlamydia, Gonorrhea, and Diabetes).  They then could use this data and create a program that could reduce the prevalence of specific diseases.  Lastly, students could map out the number of healthcare options within a community and determine provider balance within a community.  This could also help students understand the population of non/under-insured people within the community.  Those are just a few examples of how GIS could help students within a public health course.  I actually had the chance to use this software in my MPH and found it very interesting how applicable it is to real-life situations. 

            GIS is still new to the public health field and as it grows, it will be used more frequently and with better results for uses.  Until then it still helps out in numerous ways that weren’t possible before. 

References

Keast, E. M., Carlson, N. E., Chapman, N. J., & Michael, Y. L. (2010). Using built environmental observation tools: Comparing two methods of creating a measure of the builty environment. Journal of Health Promotion, 24(5), 354-361.

Mather, F. J., White, L. E., Langlois, E. C., Shorter, C. F., Swalm, C. M., Shaffer, J. G., & Hartley, W. R. (2004). Statistical methods for linking health, exposure, and hazards. Environmental Health Perspectives , 112(14), 1440-1445.

Wilson, D. K., Kirtland, K. A., Ainsworth, B. E., & Addy, C. L. (2004). Socioeconomic status and perceptions of access and safety for physcial activity. The Society of Behavioral Medicine, 28(1), 20-28.

Social Cognitive Theory

         Albert Bandura is wildly known for his contributions to the health field.  He created the Social Learning Theory (SLT) or what is known today as the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT).  The only real difference between the SLT and SCT is an added construct of self-efficacy, which will be noted in the following paragraphs.  Not only is this theory good for determining how people obtain and preserve certain behaviors, it also provides the researcher with intervention strategies.  As a health educator we use this theory on a regular basis to change behaviors, but it can be applied to any area of expertise as long as there is a desired behavior involved.

The Social Cognitive Theory is very simple in that a person’s desired behavior is affected by 3 concepts that are intertwined.  Unfortunately, there are 11 constructs of this theory that many of us confuse very easily.  To keep it simple enough to understand, this overview will touch on the three concepts and give an overview of the constructs. The theory explains that your personal and environmental factors affect your behaviors (good or bad).  Think of a triangle with one of those three concepts at each corner with arrows pointing in each direction.  As you move along the arrows, notice how each one affects the other.  “Behavior is not simply the result of the environment and the person, just as the environment is not simply the result of the person and behavior” (Glanz et al, 2002).  The fluidness of this theory is what gives it the backbone to change or maintain a desired behavior.  The 11 constructs within this theory can be interesting to learn, which enhance the underlying concepts of the theory.  To help you understand the construct with ease, there has been a brief overview added with each construct within the current objective of this assignment. 

So the objective is to apply the Social Cognitive Theory to instruction that incorporates Internet-based applications.  The desired behavior the theory will address is Internet-based instruction, more specifically using social media.  Remember that behavior affects environment and personal factors, so if the instructor is limited in any of those three then the behavior will not happen.  Behavioral capability is by far the most important construct because if the person does not understand the objective and have the necessary skills to perform a behavior then it will go nowhere.  If an instructor possesses no knowledge about social media then it will be expected that no use of it would occur within the classroom.  So the first obstacle is allowing the instructor to understand the materials taught.  When this occurs it then can be directed towards students within the classroom.  Expectations and Expectancies can be grouped together because the individual must value the importance (expectancies) of using social media within the classroom and have strong beliefs (expectations) that it will be effective.  The instructor gains this by having the knowledge.  Therefore applying social media to the classroom is more applicable and students value the expected outcome.

Locus of control and Self-Efficacy can also be lumped together because these two constructs deal with feeling control and how comfortable doing an action may be.  If the instructor feels comfortable in the material and can confidently use it, then it can be ascertained that it will be used within the classroom.  Reciprocal Determinism, Emotional-coping response, and Observational learning can all be lumped into one because they all deal with the interactions with the behavior change.  Observational learning is easy as the old saying monkey see, monkey do.  If the instructor watches other people using social medias within the classroom and notice its effectiveness then there is a higher chance the instructor will use that same method in their own classroom.  Reciprocal determinism is the interaction between the individual and their environment.  If the instructor doesn’t have the right equipment provided by the school to engage social media within the classroom, then there is disconnect in the ability to use it within the classroom.  Lastly, the Emotional-coping response deals with any emotions that may occur by learning the behavior.  An instructor might feel anxious because it might not work will not learn how to use it properly.  They must overcome that fear before they can learn.  The other constructs of this model are not applicable, but still have a place within the SCT.

For an instructor to use the SCT within the classroom they can transform their space into a social media center.  The instructor can provide activities that engage learning with social media.  An example could be a classroom Prezi page that students can collaborate with other students on specific topics that might interest them.  The instructor must reinforce any good behaviors within that classroom to ensure that students are working on task.  An example could be rewarding them with bonus points or a healthy snack for staying on task the entire class period.  The instructor must also support students as they understand the materials provided.  An example could be as students become comfortable with understanding and knowing the materials they could be the teacher and present their topics to the class using the Prezi website.  Each student could then follow along with the presentation. 

These are only a few examples on how to use the SCT within the classroom and since there are numerous constructs within the theory it seems like the possibilities are endless. As long as there is a willing teacher to try it, then there is a learning opportunity for students. 

Reference:
K.Glanz, B. Rimer, & F.M. Lewis (2002). Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice 3^rd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.