One of the leading theories for understanding the policy process is the theory of social construction and policy design developed by Anne Schneider and Helen Ingram. The theory incorporates the social construction and power of target populations to understand the development and implications of policy design. In order to better understand its empirical breadth, depth, and general utility, our analysis reviews all past publications of the theory, focusing specifically on empirical applications (N = 111), from 1993 to 2013. Based on this review, we find: a recent increase in the number of applications of this theory; that these applications appear across a wide range of outlets, relate to numerous policy domains, and are conducted by a diverse group of domestic and international scholars; that the target population proposition has been applied with greater frequency than the theory’s feed-forward proposition; and that scholars have a notable interest in understanding causal mechanisms leading to changes in the positioning of target populations among advantaged, contender, dependent, and deviant target population categories. Following a descriptive review of past publications, we offer specific suggestions for theoretical development and future research.

/pdf/social-construction-and-policy-design-a-review-of-past-3josmda9jx.pdf

Social Construction and Policy Design: A Review of Past Applications

With the national emphasis on engaged and action research approaches to enhance research with communities and improve research translation, conventional social science and health researchers will b...

The role and influence of key informants in community-engaged research: A critical perspective:

Depression—The Blue Plage

North America has a strong legacy of colonization, and a decolonizing agenda has important implications for the field of family science. Decolonizing epistemologies and research methods have gained momentum in the biological and social sciences. These research methods challenge the status quo and the superiority of Western ideologies and focus on agendas meant to honor marginalized people and their local knowledge and experiences. Decolonizing ideologies and practices offer an opportunity for researchers to decenter the existing power structure of neocolonial paradigms and knowledge production while simultaneously acknowledging the needs of multiple stakeholders in research. Our goal is to review the various forms of colonialisms, offer methodological considerations for family research, highlight the advantages and challenges of using a decolonizing approach, and offer reflexive questions to situate the researcher focused on a decolonizing research agenda for family science.

Decolonizing Research Methods for Family Science: Creating Space at the Center

One of the leading theories for understanding the policy process is the theory of social construction and policy design developed by Anne Schneider and Helen Ingram. The theory incorporates the social construction and power of target populations to understand the development and implications of policy design. In order to better understand its empirical breadth, depth, and general utility, our analysis reviews all past publications of the theory, focusing specifically on empirical applications (N = 111), from 1993 to 2013. Based on this review, we find: a recent increase in the number of applications of this theory; that these applications appear across a wide range of outlets, relate to numerous policy domains, and are conducted by a diverse group of domestic and international scholars; that the target population proposition has been applied with greater frequency than the theory’s feed-forward proposition; and that scholars have a notable interest in understanding causal mechanisms leading to changes in the positioning of target populations among advantaged, contender, dependent, and deviant target popu- lation categories. Following a descriptive review of past publications, we offer specific suggestions for theoretical development and future research.

/pdf/social-construction-and-policy-design-a-review-of-past-5gu8ns5lqk.pdf

Background: As community-based participatory research (CBPR) gains national prominence, it is increasingly important to examine critically the meaning of community participation and the roles of research participants. Many CBPR projects rely heavily on key informants, but because of their social position, economic status, or professional role, they may not represent the views of community members. Objectives: This paper compares key informant and community member perspectives about neighborhood health to explore the types of knowledge produced by each group. Methods: The data used for this study are part of a larger CBPR project, Taking Neighborhood Health to Heart (TNH2H). We conducted five focus groups with community members and 16 interviews with key informants. Results: Reported knowledge and beliefs about the community generally came from three perspectives: Primary key informant key informant reports about neighborhoods and community members), secondary key informant (key informant assessments of community member beliefs and motivations for their behaviors), and community members. A number of differences emerged between key informants and community members in the types of knowledge they shared, revealing important assumptions held by key informants about community members. Conclusions: As more funders call for health researchers to engage community members to improve the reach, impact, and translation of their research to improve population health, they must clarify what is meant by community engagement and recognize the roles that people's relative status and positions in society play in their knowledge about a given place.

Key Informants and Community Members in Community-Based Participatory Research: One Is Not Like the Other

Maintaining class, producing gender: Enhancement discourses about amphetamine in entertainment media

Chris Good’s recent article in The Atlantic Monthly poses a question that is at the heart of recent research and debates in bioethics and medical anthropology. Since ‘‘performance-enhancers are increasingly part of our modern existence, despite our instinct to ban them,’’ Good (2010) asks, ‘‘Why don’t we use them for good?’’ He recommends providing drugs such as Adderall and Ritalin to scientists to foster productivity and creativity. While I cannot attest to Good’s intentions, his question speaks to the unique social position of stimulant use in the United States (Grinspoon and Hedblom 1975; Rasmussen 2008). Amphetamines and their derivatives have, in fact, been used for these very purposes since the early 1900s (Rasmussen 2008). The aggressive, achievement-oriented nature of contemporary U.S. society may promote amphetamine use as a means of personal enhancement (Grinspoon and Hedblom 1975; Pine 2007). I use the term enhancement to describe the use of pharmaceutical technologies to meet a variety of social and cultural norms, including improving social, sexual and labor-related performance (Quintero and Nichter 2011). Research indicates that those who use illegally produced methamphetamine (henceforth, methamphetamine) and those who illegally use prescription amphetamines (henceforth, prescription amphetamines) often report enhancementrelated motivations. The drugs are used to achieve the ideal body, improve sexual performance and increase productivity (Crampton et al. 2008; Grinspoon and Hedblom 1975; Joe 1996; Pine 2007). Methamphetamine and prescription amphetamines also share a common history, Schedule II federal classification and

Stacey A. McKenna

Papers

The role and influence of key informants in community-engaged research: A critical perspective:

Key Informants and Community Members in Community-Based Participatory Research: One Is Not Like the Other

Maintaining class, producing gender: Enhancement discourses about amphetamine in entertainment media

Reproducing hegemony: the culture of enhancement and discourses on amphetamines in popular fiction.

Navigating the risk environment: Structural vulnerability, sex, and reciprocity among women who use methamphetamine