Some problems with social cognition models: A pragmatic and conceptual analysis
Some problems with social cognition models: A pragmatic and conceptual analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/0278-6133.22.4.424
复制
发表时间：
2003-07-01
影响因子：
4.2
通讯作者：
Ogden, J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ogden, J
1997 年至 2001 年间发表的 4 种健康心理学期刊的实证文章，测试或应用了 1 种或多种社会认知模型（理性行动理论、计划行为理论、健康信念模型和保护动机理论；N = 47），并对其实用和概念基础进行了审查。就其实用基础而言，这四种模型对于指导研究很有用。对它们概念基础的分析不太积极。首先，这些模型无法生成假设，因为它们的构造不具体；因此无法对它们进行测试。其次，它们关注的是分析真理而不是综合真理，并且它们的应用所得出的结论通常根据定义而不是通过观察得出的结论是正确的。最后，他们可能会创造和改变认知和行为，而不是描述它们。
Empirical articles published between 1997 and 2001 from 4 health psychology journals that tested or applied 1 or more social cognition models (theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, health belief model, and protection motivation theory; N = 47) were scrutinized for their pragmatic and conceptual basis. In terms of their pragmatic basis, these 4 models were useful for guiding research. The analysis of their conceptual basis was less positive. First, these models do not enable the generation of hypotheses because their constructs are unspecific; they therefore cannot be tested. Second, they focus on analytic truths rather than synthetic ones, and the conclusions resulting from their application are often true by definition rather than by observation. Finally, they may create and change both cognitions and behavior rather than describe them.