RICERCA ITALIANA     

The active human being as social capital. Research, intervention and formation for the development of individual and social competences

Università degli Studi di Torino

Abstract

The programme, starting from a prospective that conjugates objective and subjective data, psycho-social processes with the dynamics and characteristics of the context, proposes a multiplicity of purposes: 1) theoretical; 2) methodological; 3)"applicative".
1) As regards the theoretical objectives it is necessary to identify concepts widely used in the field of a prospective that has references in community psychology, environmental psychology as well as in a epidemiologic prospective. We refer to concepts such as social capital, personal competence, community competence, participation, social ties, individual and social empowerment. Some of these concepts as is well known refer to a "macro" prospective, aimed at studying social processes that characterise the contemporary urban contexts; the intention is that, starting from certain considerations raised by reference literature, of showing up some of the conceptual limits (that even the reference authors themselves raised), integrating an explanation of "macro" processes, with a reflection that links, as aforesaid, contextual data to that psycho-social.
The search for "strong" theoretical framework that lay down a base for solid "theory of practice" is still a present-day debate. A reflection that contributes to the broadening of the theoretic debate is one of the aims that the synergy among the five Units here involved proposes.
2) This theoretical reflection will be "translated" into indicators for the study of psycho-social processes. To project field research to describe the processes able to explain the circularity between individual competences and social capital (that is, specifying which individual competences we are talking about and which dimensions of social capital enter in relation). It will therefore be necessary to settle researches that, even though integrated, propose different specific objectives, so as to be able to widen the horizons of reflection, that is researches that permit the specification of particular aspects both of individual competences and context in which these competences would find a direct application.
Much space will be given over to qualitative and quantitative methodology, seen not as an alternative but as a different and complimentary modality to study the processes in object.
The Operative Units have for some time been interested in an in depth methodological investigation, with the aim of identifying tools for collecting the articulation between social and psychological processes in their complexity and dynamism.
3) The interest of the Operative Units is turned not only to study psycho-social processes in their natural context in which they are realised, but also consider the research part of a process more wide such as that of evaluation. The phases of research that will characterise this project will also be used as a basis for the definition and consequent application of a system of evaluation for projects and psycho-social processes.

The synergy between the five Research Units therefore will allow the development of this reflection from a theoretical to an applicative plain. It deals with, for all the Units, not only research applied to psychological phenomena in a natural context, but interventions aimed at change, in particular to the promotion of individual competence and to the development of social capital, that need a monitoring system and evaluation in order to show hic et nunc changes. The "classic" research tools will necessarily be integrated to instruments used from located research. <<<

Principal Investigator

Norma DE PICCOLI Università degli Studi di TORINO

Research Objectives

Prevention interventions and the promotion of well-being have, in Italy, over the last few years become more and more frequent (also thanks to some laws that have made this possible). Interventions that are organised in most cases in routine life, for example at school, the village/town, neighbourhood, the city; it is important to understand in what way the setting influences the people who take part, as in the same way how these, in their turn, influence their contexts. Knowledge of the territory and contexts of life, the problems and existing resources, become necessary and indispensable in order to choose projects and activities to put into act. It is likewise fundamental, from this point of view, that the different operators and services that work in the same fields and territories, communicate with each other so as to reach the established objectives: this therefore means hypothesising training coherent to the reflection reported here. In addition the need to develop a "culture of evaluation" is making headway (even though in Italy it is not as easy as in other countries) this is because the necessity to evaluate change in the single person, and in the context in which they find themselves, produced by projects it is always more urgent. It is for this reason that it is necessary to refine conceptual instruments and methodologies in order to read and interpret the reality, not only limited to the single person, but that takes into consideration the different environmental characteristics of life, so as to grasp the connections between these and perceptions, people's actions and experiences involved in them, to propose and realise targeted changes (Prezza, Santinello, 2000).
The programme, starting from a prospective that conjugates objective and subjective data, psycho-social processes with the dynamics and characteristics of the context, proposes a multiplicity of purposes: 1) theoric; 2) methodological; 3)"applicative".
1) As regards the theoric objectives it is necessary to identify concepts widely used in the field of a prospective that has references in community psychology, environmental psychology as well as in a epidemiologic prospective. We refer to concepts such as social capital, personal competence, community competence, participation, social ties, individual and social empowerment. Some of these concepts as is well known refer to a "macro" prospective, aimed at studying social processes that characterise the contemporary urban contexts; the intention of the various Units is that, starting from certain considerations raised by reference literature, of showing up some of the conceptual limits (that even the reference authors themselves raised), integrating an explanation of "macro" processes, with a reflection that links, as aforesaid, contextual data to that psycho-social.
The search for "strong" theoric framework that lay down a base for solid "theory of practice" is still a present-day debate. A reflection that contributes to the broadening of the theoretic debate is one of the aims that the synergy among the five Units here involved proposes.
2) This theoretical reflection is set within a prospective that can be summarised by Lewin's well known phrase that "There is nothing more practical than a good theory"; concepts that make up the base of theoretical reflection set by the single Units will be "translated" into indicators for the study of psycho-social processes. Much space will be given over to qualitative and quantitative methodology, seen not as an alternative but as a different and complimentary modality to study the processes in object.
The Operative Units have for some time been interested in an in depth methodological investigation, with the aim of identifying tools for collecting the articulation between social and psychological processes in their complexity and dynamism. In the prospective that we considered one should therefore combine, according to Bruner's (1987) definition, " the two way of doing science": paradigmatic and narrative. The first, based on the positivistic theory, proposes to verify the research hypothesis, to identify invariances, to construct and verify laws which allow the prediction of the evolution of a phenomena. The idea tinge with it that there exists a objective reality, recognisable and measurable. Whereas the narrative model proposes to describe a story of a phenomena in its context and it is the same narrators who construct the reality they describe; in fact according to the constructive point of view an objective reality does not exist, but all the social objects are created; here the subject is considered as active, who creates meaning through his interaction with the others (Francescato, Tomai, 2002).
3) The interest of the Operative Units is turned not only to study psycho-social processes in their natural context in which they are realised, but also consider the research part of a process more wide such as that of evaluation. The phases of research that will characterise this project will also be used as a basis for the definition and consequent application of a system of evaluation for projects and psycho-social processes.
The argument about the counter position or integration between instruments and qualitative and quantitative methods has also touch the theme of evaluation. In the 70's and 80's the prevalence of quantitative over qualitative methods began to be criticized in particular by those who worked on the evaluation of social projects (Cook, 1997). From this, a wide debate developed, between scholars who worked not only on the so said pure research but rather on applied research that showed up merits and defects of both approaches. If in fact, on one hand one can underline that the quantitative prospective allows investigation that can be descriptive, correlational, or experimental (Areni, Mannetti, 1990; Regalia, Bruno, 2000) and therefore, as regards the evaluative processes, each one of these typologies of investigation can supply indications and informations on different levels, on the other emerges the need, within an evaluative process, to pay attention to the differences, both individual and contextual, and to that which qualifies and "makes the difference" in an intervention in its uniqueness and irreducibility (Mark, Henry, 1998; Scaratti, Regalia, 2000). The qualitative approach, as is well known, answers to the need of giving voice to the single protagonist in collecting elements that are able to bring out the crucial aspect of lived experience, with particular attention paid to the contextual and relational aspects that made this experience possible and to the meanings that it generated. However aware that at a methodological level the limits of the qualitative approach regard the definition on the investigation unit to sample, the reliability of the instruments, the elaboration of the qualitative data collected and the verifying of the results. In particular the crucial problems regard scientific credibility of the procedures used in the production of data and their interpretation (Seale, 1999, Scaratti and Regalia, 2000). <<<

Timescale

24 months

National and international background

The study presented here has as its bases the lively debate between scholars who intend on contributing to the theoric and methodological development of community psychology. A discipline which is rather young and still in the consolidation phase, if compared to other psychological disciplines considered more solid from a scientific and theoric point of view. Today after about 40 years from the official birth of this discipline is it possible to affirm that it has its own conceptual and methodological identity? The answer is not of a unified voice, in fact if on one hand, we look at the theoric models and the proposed operational-methodologies that come from it, we will undoubtedly find concepts that characterise community psychology, such as empowerment, community development, social network, action- research, participation; on the other, its theoric-methodological set-up has meant elaboration in frontier areas that have not always been easily accessible, as asserted by Amerio (2000). Also Wolff who, in an article of 2000, retained that the place held by applied community psychology seems to be uncertain and as yet not well defined.
Levine and Perkins (1987) retained that community psychology is substantially "a way of thinking"; it would present itself, that is to say, not so much as a classically defined discipline, but as an ideology, a collection of values and attitudes "the attitude is of a commitment towards social change, ideology requires the adoption of a systemic-ecological orientation and a focalization on prevention, the values aim at the development of the competences of the subjects and at the promotion of cultural diversity" (Rappaport,1977). We can consider Rappaport's definition as a sort of summa of principles that guide "the action" of community psychologist. "The action" should include, in its putting into practice, an intervention running parallel to research, the latter considered as an indispensable element of the community operation.: research to evaluate the existing needs in that context, research to evaluate how to organise and programme the intervention, research to evaluate the different phases of the work, research to evaluate the outcomes of operation already completed etc. etc.
Community psychology put itself forward as an interdisciplinary prospective, that "imports" from different disciplines theoric models, constructs and concepts. The originality of this discipline seems to reside eminently in the applicative proposal and intervention.; it proposes "new ways" to practice the psychological profession, on one hand for the contexts in which the psychological intervention has fallen or on the other due to the modality in which the psychologist exercise his/her know-how. This does not mean the no "effort" of theoric systemisation has been made, that are in certain ways still in the completion phase. The idea of human being underlying this point of view is that of an active subject, that means a subject able to construct/reconstruct the world in which he lives not only in the field of his mind but also by means of his concrete activity (Amerio, 2000). Moreover it is an active subject "in context", that is, human being is a social being and therefore it is possible to describe and to understand the perceptions, feelings, thoughts and actions that develop within social relations within the context in which they are expressed and shown.
They are the products of the social context and this, in its turn, is modified and conditioned by the subject's actions; therefore it is necessary to study both the subjects and the context in which they are inserted, articulating subjective data with that objective and the individual processes with the collective one; people, the social and environmental world are considered and analyzed in their inter-relations (see the Lewin's Field-theory). Also from a practical point of view of the intervention, an operative modality is necessary that takes into consideration the articulation between the macro-social level, in order to promote a co-habitation public policy, the environmental level, as long as it does not only deal with the modifying of physical space, but also that of social relation, creating areas of support among the different structures already existing in the community and the individual level, in order to awaken, inform and increase the competences of the individual in respect to the disease lived in/by the community (Noto, Lavanco, 2000).
A shared theoric-methodological platform is that which moves towards the Lewinian point of view, both in reference to field theory and also in relation to action-research.
The action-research was introduced by Kurt Lewin in the 40's who refusing behaviourist reductionism that reigned in American psychology for the whole of the first half of the 20th. Century, and putting forward the surmounting of a mechanistic view in the studies of psychological phenomenon, considered the close inter-relation between factors that intervene in a here and now situation. Through his field theory he proposed a theoric model, aimed at studying the inter-dependence of coexisting events ("facts") at a given moment, he meant for "facts", both the perceptions, representations, knowledges, evaluations and aspirations of the subject and those elements of the outside environment that intervene or interfere with the psychological facts and also those facts that, even though present, do not enter the subject's field, that is, in his "life space", in that given moment. Lewin's thought is very rich and still current. It is sufficient here to remember that his scientific activities have extended to the study of human and social phenomena, there where they are concretely lived, conducting interesting researches and formulating a study method to describe a natural context and at the same time constructing actions aimed at change, that have given great impetus to the study of group processes and phenomena of social change.
Consistently with his theoretical approach and given, among his objectives, the intention of reducing the difference that was outlined in psychology between theory and practice ( Lewin's statement that sustains that there is nothing more practical than a good theory, is famous). Lewin proposes a method "to produce a controlled change", using into a natural context the instruments of scientific investigation.
The action-research was conceived as a cyclic process of investigation that takes in the diagnosis of a problematic situation, the planning of the different action phases, the implementation and evaluation of the results. This last phase foresees a new diagnosis of the situation that has been created by the preceding activities of the cycle (Elden, Chisholm, 1993).
The evaluation phase is essential in the action-research process, as it should be in any social intervention. Lewin himself showed the importance to find some objective parameters to evaluate the results of the intervention; without this even the operators themselves would be unable to show the efficacy of their work because they do not have "objective" information about the quality of their professional work, consequently this impedes them from "learning from experience" because data is unavailable in order to evaluate the aspects that have worked (and therefore they could eventually repeat) from those that have made up an element of criticality.
"if it is not possible to evaluate the efficacy of an action, if there are no criteria to judge the ratio effort/results, one runs the risk of formulating wrong conclusions or to encourage inadequate work habits. A solid knowledge and a realistic evaluation of the facts are the requirements of any learning" (Lewin, 1951; Palmonari, Zani, 1996, page 108).
Substantially, the objective of action-research is community empowerment. Empowerment, referred to both at an individual, group and community level, is a concept that sets out control as the capacity, real or perceived, to intervene in decisions, critical awareness of how the power structures and decisional processes work and participation as an instrument to obtain the foreseen results (Zimmerman, 1999). In particular, when referred to community it deals with making the community become competent, that is it acquires a repertoire of possibilities and alternatives; it knows where and how to obtain resources and has the capacity to ask and obtain autonomy (Iscoe, 1984). The objective is that of contributing to the development of competent "community" both from a political (that is informed and interested in the management of public things), and social and relational point of view; that is community based not only on critical reflection, but also on reciprocal respect, care taking activity and participation. A "competent" community should be one that is a producer of health, in the wider acceptation given to this concept, meant in its bio-psycho-social components and likewise aimed at the promotion of health, intended as "that process for which people increase the control and direct management of their own conditions of well-being and/or disease (OMS, 1987). The bio-psycho-social model considers global health of the people in their environments, with a greater emphasis on health promotion, meant as a realization of self, exploration of something new, more than on the prevention of illness (Zani, Cicognani, 2000). Among the concepts that, more than others, make up the epistemological picture to which we refer, let us remember: community, sense of community, participation, social network, social support, empowerment, social capital. They are all considered as multilevel concepts, being that they propose to study the articulation between more than one dimension: individual, group, and that of community. The wide theoric view with which these dimensions are considered create difficulties regarding research: in fact, analysing the many studies published in the numerous scientific reviews of the sector we can notice that, in most cases, they investigate separately these levels, analyzing more psychological aspects (for example self-esteem, locus of control, self-efficacy) or dimensions that characterize community (reference values and culture, socio-demographic aspects, structural aspects etc.). It is true that the articulation between these different dimensions can perhaps be seen over time, which means to equip oneself for longitudinal studies. The concept of social capital does not escape this kind of criticism either. It has awakened interest, even with the criticisms that we have already stated, because it seems to express the idea of "social as a resource". It has examined different levels of analysis.
For Putnam (1996) social capital encompasses features of social life – networks, norms (including reciprocity) and trust – that enable participants to act together more effectively. Coleman (1990) defines social capital in terms of its structural, relational and functional elements, while for Jacobs (1960), it refers to networks which provide a basis for trust, cooperation and perception of safety.
In fact also social capital can be considered to different levels of analysis: it can be broken down as regards an individual level, a "micro" level (in terms of social support network for example) and a "macro" level (in terms of institutions and community). As "community", social capital is a contested and complex concept that puts forward theoric and consequently methodological questions such as: should it be most usefully considered as a resource for individuals or neighbourhoods; to what extent is context influential; can its effect be negative or its structure bounded and exclusionary? What is the nature of the relationship between networks, trust and norms? <<<