3 results
Local contextual factors of child stunting found via shared values of stakeholder groups: an exploratory case study in Kaffrine, Senegal
- Juan Manuel Moreno, Annabel J Chapman, Chike C Ebido, Ndèye Marième Sougou, Amadou H Diallo, Rahel Neh Tening, Fatou Binetou Dial, Jessica Massonnié, Mahsa Firoozmand, Cheikh El Hadji Abdoulaye Niang, Claire Heffernan, Marie K Harder
-
- Journal:
- Public Health Nutrition / Volume 26 / Issue 11 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 June 2023, pp. 2418-2432
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Objective:
This work aims to demonstrate an original approach to identify links between locally situated shared values and contextual factors of stunting. Stunting results from multi-factorial and multi-sectoral determinants, but interventions typically neglect locally situated lived experiences, which contributes to problematic designs that are not meaningful for those concerned and/or relatively ineffective.
Design:This case study investigates relevant contextual factors in two steps: by first facilitating local stakeholder groups (n 11) to crystallise their shared-values-in-action using a specialised method from sustainability studies (WeValue_InSitu (WVIS)). Secondly, participants (n 44) have focus group discussions (FGD) about everyday practices around child feeding/food systems, education and/or family life. Because the first step strongly grounds participants in local shared values, the FGD can reveal deep links between contextual factors and potential influences on stunting.
Setting:Kaffrine, Senegal, an ‘Action Against Stunting Hub’ site. December 2020.
Participants:Eleven stakeholder groups of mothers, fathers, grandmothers, pre-school teachers, community health workers, farmers, market traders and public administrators.
Results:Local contextual factors of stunting were identified, including traditional beliefs concerning eating and growing practices; fathers as decision-makers; health worker trust; financial non-autonomy for women; insufficient water for preferred crops; merchants’ non-access to quality produce; religious teachings and social structures affecting children’s food environment.
Conclusions:Local contextual factors were identified. Pre-knowledge of these could significantly improve effectiveness of intervention designs locally, with possible applicability at other sites. The WVIS approach proved efficient and useful for making tangible contextual factors and their potential links to stunting, via a lens of local shared values, showing general promise for intervention research.
Cultural contributions to adults' self-rated mental health problems and strengths: 7 culture clusters, 28 societies, 16 906 adults
- William E. Copeland, Masha Y. Ivanova, Thomas M. Achenbach, Lori V. Turner, Guangyu Tong, Adelina Ahmeti-Pronaj, Alma Au, Monica Bellina, J. Carlos Caldas, Yi-Chuen Chen, Ladislav Csemy, Marina M. da Rocha, Anca Dobrean, Lourdes Ezpeleta, Yasuko Funabiki, Valerie S. Harder, Felipe Lecannelier, Marie Leiner de la Cabada, Patrick Leung, Jianghong Liu, Safia Mahr, Sergey Malykh, Jasminka Markovic, David M. Ndetei, Kyung Ja Oh, Jean-Michel Petot, Geylan Riad, Direnc Sakarya, Virginia C. Samaniego, Sandra Sebre, Mimoza Shahini, Edwiges Silvares, Roma Simulioniene, Elvisa Sokoli, Joel B. Talcott, Natalia Vazquez, Tomasz Wolanczyk, Ewa Zasepa
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 53 / Issue 16 / December 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 May 2023, pp. 7581-7590
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Background
It is unknown how much variation in adult mental health problems is associated with differences between societal/cultural groups, over and above differences between individuals.
MethodsTo test these relative contributions, a consortium of indigenous researchers collected Adult Self-Report (ASR) ratings from 16 906 18- to 59-year-olds in 28 societies that represented seven culture clusters identified in the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness study (e.g. Confucian, Anglo). The ASR is scored on 17 problem scales, plus a personal strengths scale. Hierarchical linear modeling estimated variance accounted for by individual differences (including measurement error), society, and culture cluster. Multi-level analyses of covariance tested age and gender effects.
ResultsAcross the 17 problem scales, the variance accounted for by individual differences ranged from 80.3% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems to 95.2% for DSM-oriented avoidant personality (mean = 90.7%); by society: 3.2% for DSM-oriented somatic problems to 8.0% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems (mean = 6.3%); and by culture cluster: 0.0% for DSM-oriented avoidant personality to 11.6% for DSM-oriented anxiety problems (mean = 3.0%). For strengths, individual differences accounted for 80.8% of variance, societal differences 10.5%, and cultural differences 8.7%. Age and gender had very small effects.
ConclusionsOverall, adults' self-ratings of mental health problems and strengths were associated much more with individual differences than societal/cultural differences, although this varied across scales. These findings support cross-cultural use of standardized measures to assess mental health problems, but urge caution in assessment of personal strengths.
Three - Implicit values: uncounted legacies
- Edited by Keri Facer, University of Bristol, Kate Pahl, Manchester Metropolitan University
-
- Book:
- Valuing Interdisciplinary Collaborative Research
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 05 April 2022
- Print publication:
- 05 April 2017, pp 65-84
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
University–community collaborations are often complex, fraught, emotional affairs. Participants devote a lot of time, energy and emotion to bridging differences, improvising solutions, and making things work. This can be difficult and sometimes frustrating, but can also have a transformative legacy for the participants and the wider communities they are part of. These legacies, however, are not always easy to observe, identify and authorise. As we will explore in this chapter, some of the most important legacies of community–university partnerships are intangible and refer to emotions, affects, ongoing processes and emerging potentials: for example, inspiration, confidence, friendship, as well as knowledge, ideas and networks. These legacies are at least as important as projects’ harder, more tangible and easily measurable legacies.
Our exploration of legacies started with a shared interest in the role that values play in collaborative research, and in the way in which we understand related outcomes. Exploring this through the concept of legacy was particularly relevant as it allows for a more fluid understanding, and one that can be shaped by the local project context. Thus, the theoretical starting point for this work was that making the values within collaborative projects explicit would allow for the identification and evaluation of those, ‘less tangible’, legacies. Our University of Brighton authors Harder, Burford and Hoover previously established that a values-based approach could be very successful for evaluating ‘intangible’ outcomes and achievements projects led by civil society organisations (Burford et al, 2013). They brought the approach, named WeValue, as a raw starting point to the members of two complex partnerships called Scaling Up Co-Design and the Authority Research Network (ARN), and then collectively as a consortium we co-explored, co-developed and co-generated a localisable, values-based approach for a new purpose: to identify and legitimise legacies (not only outcomes) from partnership projects (not projects from a single group or organisation).
By ‘starting from values’, we mean starting with what participants consider valuable, meaningful and worthwhile in the context of their group or partnership. An explicit values lens is first locally constructed, and then used to view, identify and evaluate legacies. The WeValue approach was previously developed to allow a formal, rigorous evaluation of ‘soft’ or ‘intangible’ achievements.