Basic and Applied Social Psychology

ISSN: 0197-3533 (Print) 1532-4834 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hbas20

Approaches Towards Social Problems: A

Conceptual Model

Christine Ovcharchyn-Devitt , Pat Calby , Lucie Carswell , William Perkowitz ,

Brian Scruggs , Robin Turpin & Leonard Bickman

To cite this article: Christine Ovcharchyn-Devitt , Pat Calby , Lucie Carswell , William Perkowitz ,
Brian Scruggs , Robin Turpin & Leonard Bickman (1981) Approaches Towards Social Problems:
A Conceptual Model, Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 2:4, 275-287, DOI: 10.1207/
s15324834basp0204_4

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0204_4

Published online: 07 Jun 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 5

View related articles

Citing articles: 2 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hbas20

Download by: [University of Cambridge] Date: 16 June 2016, At: 19:39

 BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1981,2 (4) 275-287

Approaches Towards Social Problems:

A Conceptual Model

Christine Ovcharchyn-Devitt
Pat Calby
Lucie carswell
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

William Perkowitz
Brian Scruggs
Robin Turpin
Loyola University of Chicago

Leonard Bickman
Peabody College of Vanderbilt University

INTRODUCTION

There is currently a strong movement in social psychology away from the the-
oretically derived study of social behavior toward the study of significant social
problems. However, the effectiveness of social psychologists to impact on social
problems has been called into question. In discussing the impact of Division 9,
the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI) on social prob-
lems, Rappaport and Kren (1975) stated flatly that "no one can point to any
significant social change or amelioration of social problems as a result of the
SPSSI enterprise." Singer (1979) has gone as far as to say that "the most costly
failure in the 20th century social science has been the failure to think through
the relationship between knowledge and action." The substance of Singer's
complaint is the focus of this paper. We believe that there is some truth in this
statement, and that part of the reason for this failure lies in the narrow focus of
social psychologists.
Social psychology, in its struggle to regain its Lewinian roots in social action,
is attempting to redirect some of its energies. But, the years of laboratory research
have served to remove the discipline both literally and figuratively from the rest

This paper is one of the products of a seminar on applied social psychology taught by Leonard
Bickman.
Requests for reprints should be sent to Leonard Bickman. Dept. of Psychology. and Human
Development. Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. Box 59 Nashville, Tenn. 37203.
 of the world. Its theories and methodologies have been primarily directed toward
the understanding of social processes independent of the wider social context.
In this form, research findings are not directly applicable to the solution of social
problems. Moreover, society's change agents cannot be expected to operation-
alize and apply research findings on their own. Many social psychologists are
just realizing that some of their resources need to be directed at providing
knowledge that can be the foundation of action. Moreover, some psychologists
have begun to feel some responsibility to direct their findings to the needs of
social planners, and implementers as well as peers. There are a number oftrends
in social psychology which will assist us in moving in this direction.
It is our contention that new emphasis on interdisciplinary research will serve
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

to increase the impact of social psychology on social problems more greatly than
any direct attempts on the part of our colleagues to change the nature of social
psychology research. This paper will present a framework for conceptualizing
social problems in terms that are hoped will foster both coordination of effort
among social researchers, and more effective communication with those charged
with actually implementing social change.
One of the first tasks that needs to be accomplished before moving into the
applied world should be the development of a practical framework from which
to view social problems. A shared conceptualization of social problems should
help organize and direct interventions, research, and theories toward defined
goals, not only within social psychology, but between our discipline and others
concerned with social issues. Such a framew~rkhas proven so elusive that no
one widely accepted conceptualization exists. The following discussion presents
our efforts toward filling this gap, couched in terms that are hoped will spark
interest in the development of problem-specific knowledge that can be success-
fully applied to social issues.
Our model, to be delineated later, is meant to be applied to the diagnosis of
specific issues facing the social researcher, such that the concerns of policy-
makers will be incorporated in the research design and not just cursorily addressed
in the final report. As the most pressing need of social planners is the application
of effective intervention strategies to keep their programs viable, our model is
particularly aimed at the objective identification and empirical evaluation of
intervention strategies that are diagnosed as having the best probability for success
in each problem situation.
This paper first reviews previous attempts at defining social problems in the
social sciences. After discussing pertinent issues that have arisen, criteria for
the definition of social problems are presented, and a conceptual framework for
the definition and categorization of social problems is offered. The heuristic
model derived from this framework is also presented, and its relationship to
intervention strategies is discussed.
 PREVIOUS CONCEPTUALIZATION OF SOCIAL
PROBLEMS

in response to the call by Rappaport and Kren (1975) for a "critical analysis of
past efforts and earlier principles," the present paper devotes attention to a
critical evaluation of previous attempts. Previous approaches to the study of
social problems have generally been disciplinary in scope, focusing on the level
of analysis common to that discipline. The separate analysis of social problems
within each discipline has led to very little consensus among the social sciences
as a whole as to exactly what constitutes a social problem.
While sociologists have generally taken a theoretical viewpoint, focusing on
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

the societal level of analysis, social psychologists have focused on an individual

level of analysis. In formulating our conceptualization of social problems, we
have attempted to incorporate what we think are the best of existing definitions.

Sociological approaches. Sociologists have long been concerned with the

development of a theoretical definition of social problems and have devoted
considerable effort towards the establishment of generic criteria. The classic
paper by Fuller and Myers in 1941 characterizes the types of issues sociologists
traditionally study under the rubric "social problem." They categorize a social
problem as "a condition which is defined by a considerable number of people
as a deviation from some social norm which they cherish" (p. 320). Each social
problem consists of two elements: (1) an objective condition and (2) asubjective
evaluation which defines that condition as undesirable, destructive, or immoral.
The past 40 years, however, have seen the emergence of a variety of socio-
logical approaches corresponding to major theoretical shifts within the discipline.
Rubington and Weinberg (1971) have analyzed the development of five different
sociological perspectives: (1) social pathology; (2) social disorganization; (3)
value conflict; (4) deviant behavior; and (5) labeling. Major differences between
the five perspectives can be dichotomized according to the source of value
judgment. The social pathology, social disorganization, and deviant behavior
perspectives share a functionalist approach in basing the definition of social
problems on the "objective conditions" criterion alone. Social problems are
seen as objective realities and do not depend on any collective recognition or
public opinion. As Kitsuse and Spector (1973) point out, this criterion by itself
fails to specify who decides a given condition as undesirable or problematic.
The issue conflict and labeling perspectives are derived from the value-conflict
school and define social problems as subjective etaluations which originate in
publlc opinion rather than in objective reality.
In addition to (he subjective-objective criterion, Fuller and Myer (1941) refer
to the "natural history" or stages of development of a social problem. Social
 problems are not perceived as emerging full-blown but rather, pass through a
number of distinct stages in their emergence and maturation. While the major
focus of the original analysis is on the emergence of social awareness, the
reformulation of Kitsuse and Spector (1973) stresses their persistence or reoc-
currence during the maturation stage with a concommitant need for alternate
interventions.

Definitional criteria. Although no single definition exists, an analysis of the

foregoing approaches reveals several common characteristics or criteria: (1) a
subjective or objective value judgment; (2) undesirable conditions, which is
alternatively formulated as norm deviation or violation; (3) impact on a large
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

number of people; and (4) persistency or reoccurrence.

Social psychological approaclzes. While sociologists have typically been con-

cerned with the theoretical issues surrounding the definition, social psychologists
have focused on the more practical or applied aspects to identify those problems
most amenable to psychological research. An example is provided by Wilson's
(1973) definition of pornography as a social issue suitable for research. He
concludes that if common understandings are accepted, social issues can be
defined as "any matter involving controversy or uncertainty over the well-being
of substantial numbers of people" (p. 17). Rappaport and Kren f1975), in their
analysis, point out the inadequacy of the above definition, in that it allows almost
any important matter of public policy or practice to be termed a social problem.
The above authors similarly evaluate the more formal attempts of psychological
organizations as "clearly inadequate," specifically citing the futility of SPSSI
efforts to date. As was previously mentioned, they suggested that the first task
in the construction of a more meaningful relationship between psychology and
social problems is the development of generic criteria.
An SPSSI task force, organized in response to this criticism, identified four
dimensions of social issues: ( 1 ) narrowlbroad scope; (2) short termilong term
focus; (3) linkage versus exclusivity; and (4) proactive versus reactive (Mayo,
1979). These dimensions, however, are more concerned with delineating the
role of SPSSI in the selection of problems appropriate for psychological research
and do not directly address the issue at hand. Further, their utility within even
this Iimited scope remains to be established, as the critical points within each
dimension remain unresolved.
Six years have passed since Kappaport and Kren called for the development
of generic criteria; yet, this challenge to psychological research remains virtually
unanswered. Our approach incorporates previous approaches to social problems
and establishes not only general theoretical guidelines, but is also responsive to
the needs of the profession in the selection of problems appropriate for research.
 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR DEFINING A SOCIAL
PROBLEM

Some of the common elements of prior definitions of social problems include:

(1) the presence of a negative effect on those involved; (2) the involvement of
a large number of people; (3) chronicity and intractability of the problem; and
(4) social consensus that a problem exists. These salient aspects, taken as a
whole, constitute the basis of our conceptual framework for defining a social
problem. Although each of these criteria have been proposed before, this defi-
nitional framework is unique in requiring that all four criteria be met in consid-
ering any situation to be a social problem. The relationship of each criteria to
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

social problems is considered in the following.

Negative effect. The situation must exert a negative impact on the people
affected. This impact may be evident on several levels, in that the negative effect
may be judged in relation to basic needs of the individual, or may be judged in
relation to a societal effect.

Number of people affected. The number of people affected by a problem partly

determines its severity. In this way, a set of priorities can be established. A
problem with a severe negative effect on a large number of people would clearly
have first priority, while the same severe impact on only a few people will not
need to be dealt with as immediately. The number of people affected by any
problem needs to be reliably and objectively assessed, with multiple sources of
data included to reduce any systematic biases.

Intractability of the problem. A social problem can be differentiated from a

temporary unpleasant situation by considering the history of its occurrence, and
previous attempts at solutions. The outcomes of such interventions, and the
circumstances surrounding the current manifestations of the problem are all clues
to unaerlying causality. They need to be considered if future attempts at inter-
vention are to be successful.

Social consensus. The last, but perhaps most crucial criteria in this framework
is the extent to which society as a whole agrees that the negative effectsgenerated
by the problem are amenable to change, and further, that some action should
be taken. The impetus for change will not be sustained unless a large segment
of the population, or at least those in position to shape public opinion, are
convinced that the problem warrants action. History is rife with examples of
reforms that did not have enough public support (e.g., Prohibition) and failed
as a consequence.
This criteria implies that society makes the ultimate judgment regarding the
 acceptability of the actions of individuals. For example, in the case of social
traps, as defined by Platt (1973), an individual may not realize that the long-
term consequences of apparently innocuous or pleasant courses of action are
actually hazardous. In these cases, the individual may not consider the issue to
be a problem, where experts, or those in authority would. As much of social
research is supported by government funds, this in itself may be sufficient to
meet the criteria of social consensus. However, the researcher should be aware
of social trap situations, where those involved may not consider a problem to
exist, and thus may resist intervention efforts.
In summary, our conceptual framework for defining a social problem consists
of four criteria that need to be met in order to consider a situation a social
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

problem. These are: (1) negative effect; (2) large number of people affected;
(3) chronicity and intractability; and (4) social consensus. These criteria also
serve as the foundation for a heuristic model of information categories that the
researcher should be concerned with in order to increase the utility of his or her
research for policy-makers. Without this focus on the information needs of
societal change agents, social psychological knowledge will continue to have
little, if any, impact on the amelioration of social problems. This definition is,
of course, general in nature. Specific weights for each criteria are not indicated
nor are there threshold values present, i.e., how many people need to be affected.
The framework is just that. It provides a general guide for examining social
issues in both a comparative and absolute fashion. The researcher and policy-
maker need to consider all four factors in defining a social problem.

HEURISTIC MODEL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL

RESEARCH AS APPLIED TO SOCIAL PROBLEMS

Figure 1 outlines the dynamics of the research process that should follow from
the assessment of events as a social problem, via the four definitional factors
(negative impact, number of people affected, chronicity of the problem, and
social consensus) incorporated in our conceptual framework. Once a social prob-
lem has been identified, the researcher should gather more specific information,
in order to decide on an intervention strategy that would be most appropriate to
apply to the problem. This model provides guidelines for assessing information
on a social problem in a form that should result in a comprehensive picture of
that problem. Utilizing such a guideline should ultimately allow policy-makers
to make an objective, data based, choice of intervention strategies which will
have the greatest probability of success. The model specifies five salient aspects
of any social problem that need to be identified:

1. The process of the problem, or the dynamics of the problem behavior.

2. The characteristics of the group affected by the problem.
 Intervention Continued
I-----------------------
-#
I I
1 '?L/
Information Needed Regarding
Intervention Reevaluation of The Social
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

Social Problem
Strategies Social Problem Problem
B
Dynamics of problem be- Criteria
havior * Societal Negative effects Reduced
Characteristics of groups level
a
Number of people /
affected Group affected i
+ O '
v I
Impact of the problem level . Intractability of
Environmentaltinterper- Individual problem behavior
level 0
sonal factors that co- Social consensus
Social Program vary with problem beha-
r - D
b

vior C
Previously substantiated h
C)
I
pact causes of problem a D
Number of
people n d
3'
affected I g Little Change
Chronicity I e
I In Social
of problem I Problem
Social con- I Criteria
sensus I D
n
I I
I I L
I Information Search Repeated I $
C-,---,,-,,---,,,-,-------------------A
FIG. 1. Heuristic Model for Research on Social Problems
 Impact of the problem.
Environmental and interpersonal factors that covary with the problem,
such that its indirect consequences and associated phenomena will be taken
into account.
5. Knowledge of any substantiated causes of the problem, obtained through
review of past attempts at intervention, and relevant theoretical research.

Each of these five categories of information are proposed to be necessary for

complete consideration of any social problem. In addition, the unique config-
uration of information obtained through this process is proposed to suggest the
level (i.e., societal, group, or individual) at which an intervention would be best
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

applied to ameliorate the problem. In this way, the researcher can aim his or her
recommendation toward policy-makers at the appropriate level. Once an inter-
vention strategy has been implemented, the next step is to reassess the social
problem in light of any behavior change that is fostered, to decide if the activity
still meets the criteria of a social problem. If the intervention has reduced the
level of the four criteria sufficiently, the behavior change mechanism would
merit being implemented on a continuing basis, perhaps on a broader scale.
Should the four criteria exhibit little change from their initial levels, the infor-
mation search process would need to be repeated and another intervention strategy
implemented, or the previous strategy reformulated (e.g., avoiding first mistakes
in its implementation, etc .).
As the crucial element of this model is the information search process, the
following is a detailed description of each of the five information categories.
1 . Dynamics of the problem-the scenario. The initial stage in dealing with
a social problem is the explication of its observable dynamics in real-world
terms. This goes beyond labeling the substantive topic area under which the
problem situation belongs (e.g., pollution, substandard health, juvenile delin-
quency, etc.) What is necessary before any intervention can be planned is a
thorough description of the events that constitute the problem. The amount of
detail required in each situation will vary, but it is recommended that the re-
searcher (or program planner) actually write our a step-by-step scenario of the
situation as he or she understands it.
This script would serve several purposes. First, it will allow the researcher
to assess what information is already available, and clarify what critical facts
still need to be obtained. By conceptualizing the events in action terms, the
relationships among key variables should be more apparent, and associated phe-
nomena can be identified. From this written scenario, the researcher can more
easily verify his or her perceptions of the problem against versions supplied by
samples of participants, such as those commissioning the research, and those
involved in the problem situation. This may be the most effective way of un-
 covering circumstances where individual judgments of the nature of the problem,
and social consensus do not coincide.
An example of this initial step might be as follows: A social psychologist is
commissioned by the Labor Department to study the problem of racial discrim-
ination in the workforce, and to make recommendations for possible solutions.
Based on interviews with those government authorities, the investigator writes
out his or her version of the problem. This would include identifying the groups
most likely to be discriminated against, groups in the workforce which may be
primarily responsible for this discrimination, under what conditions this problem
is likely to occur, and the impact this problem is having on those involved. Once
the most salient aspects of the situation are spelled out in the scenario, the
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

investigator can proceed to more formally assess what information in each cat-
egory is still lacking.
Accuracy of information is crucial to the success of any research or program
plan. By incorporating many sources of information in this initial phase, sys-
tematic biases can be avoided. In addition, adequate "baseline" information as
to the actual extent of the problem may reveal that the present situation does not
merit further attention, in that the criteria for a social problem have not been
met. This would prevent waste of resources that might be better applied to more
pressing problems. One of the difficulties inherent in this procedure is the strong
possibility that scenarios written by different parties will not coincide.
2. The affected population. Once a social issue is designated and broadly
outlined, the next step is to more stringently define the key variables. The
scenario identifies the primary and secondary populations, and indicates their
role in contributing to the problem and suffering its negative consequences.
Describing the demographic characteristics of these populations clarifies the
dynamics of the social processes involved, and provides further indication of
the extent of the problem. In addition to specifying the age, sex, race, ethnicity,
and socioeconomic status, the location of these populations in social settings
should also be considered. These settings might include urban or rural, insti-
tutional (e.g., families, schools, industries), geopolitical or economic (e.g.,
industrial nation, developing country), or other relevant locations.
The prominent demographic characteristics in our example are race and eth-
nicity. The scope of the issue is revealed as the information is specified. For
example, discrimination could be studied with respect to a particular minority,
or all groups suffering from discrimination. Socioeconomic status is also a central
dimension of racial conflicts, and identifies differences in discrimination patterns,
such as among white or blue collar positions. In addition, sex and age are
important in determining the breadth of discrimination. Youth may have different
values than preceding generations, yet these values may have some precedence
in history and thus point to a chronic problem. Sex differences could indicate
 an approaching change in discrimination patterns as women entering the work-
force may have different attitudes from men. Discrimination in employment
locates the problem in business organizational settings, by definition. However,
depending on the scope of the research, environments that are indirectly, but
perhaps just as severely affected, such as families, may need to be considered.
3 . Impact of the problem. A social problem is conceptualized as having neg-
ative effects on enough people to have created an awareness of the problem in
society. Therefore, the magnitude of the problem's impact is actually the first
piece of information available, as it is this impact that has brought attention to
the situation in the first place.
The identification of impact may have to be made on several levels in order
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

to obtain an accurate picture of the magnitude of the problem. The primary level
that should be considered is how the problem events are affecting the individuals
in each group under consideration. It is expected that each group will be affected
differentially. Moreover, as social psychologists, we should be very sensitive
to the distinctions between perceived impact and actual impact since both play
an important role in defining the impact. In the example of racial discrimination
in the workforce, those groups discriminated against may receive such tangible
negative effects as insufficient wages, blocked opportunities for promotion, in-
terpersonal hostility with the discriminating group, and attendent psychological
ill effects (frustration, depression, helplessness). On the other hand, the dis-
criminating group may be affected by both positive and negative outcomes. They
may enjoy higher wage and promotion benefits, and the psychological comfort
of working with compatible (i.e., same race or ethnicity) co-workers. However,
the greater the number of workers affected negatively, the more likely it is that
the discriminating group will experience negative consequences, such as inter-
personal tension or hostility.
The impact of the problem will also be found to have negative outcomes on
a secondary level if the negative effects generated by the problem are sufficiently
great. Significant others involved with the dircct participants in the problem may
also be affected. The families of the discriminated group may suffer conse-
quences, such as inadequate material goods (food, clothing, etc.) and negative
psychological/emotional states (frustration, conflict over resources). Those in
authority in the work place may be forced to deal with negative consequences
of the problem also, such as increased grievance actions, and lower production
rates due to conflict among the workers.
The impact of the problem may eventually lead to negative effects on a societal
level, if a substantial number of people involved, and the consequences of the
problem are severe. In this example, the negative effects have become sufficiently
widespread to warrant the attention of the Labor Department, the group com-
missioning the research.
It can be concluded that a social problem will have negative impact on various
 levels of society, from the immediate, personal level, through impact on sig-
nificant others, and finally to society as a whole. At what level the problem will
have its most far-reaching effects will depend on the magnitude of negative
consequences, and the number of people affected. The researcher will need to
assess which level will benefit most from direct intervention, and which levels
can be safely assumed to improve as a result of indirect intervention.
The decision as to which system or level at which to implement the intervention
is not only a critical methodological one but also a political one. For example,
Ryan (1971) has noted that our culture's tendency to blame the individual victim
results in interventions at the often incorrect person level instead of larger in-
stitutional or systems level.
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

4. Environmental and interpersonal covariation. Covariation refers to the

descriptive conditions which occur simultaneously with a particular social prob-
lem. Due to the inherent complexities of most: social problems, these conditions
are likely to occur on more than one level of analysis. As such, even the least
complex problems have covarying conditions at both the environmental and
interpersonal leveIs.
(a) Environmental covariation: The environmental or macro-surroundings de-
scribe the conditions prevalent in the society as a whole when the problem
occurs. These conditions can be classified into two types: relatively short-ranged
and immediate event, or the longer-term and historical state. Each can serve as
descriptors of the problem in any given situation. In applying our example of
racial discrmination in employment, these differences can be easily illustrated.
For instance, the events which occur in the macro-society, such as a race riot
in a given city, might serve as precipitators for cases of discrimination within
that city.
The state of the macro-society deals not only with conditions of a longer-
ranging nature, but also with the culture embedded within any given society.
Thus, our society had, until recently, espoused the practice of discrimination,
especially in the job market. Therefore, events and states are distinguished
primarily by the time elements and chronicity of the covariation.
(b) Interpersonal covariation: In a similar manner, the interpersonal or micro-
environment describes the conditions surrounding the individual. These covar-
iance~can similarly be classified as either events or states relating to the indi-
vidual. An individual event which can precipitate an act of discrimination is
exemplified by an instance of poor work performance by a member of a minority
group, which leads the employer to think negatively about all members of this
minority. A firm or the individual in charge of hiring within a firm may support
a tradition of discrimination which creates a micro-state of discriminatory practice
within this particular firm.
As with the macro-environment, events and states are distinguished by the
time element and chronicity of the covariation. Individual events can include
 such examples as losing employment, or the death of a spouse, while individual
states can range from a personality disorder to the development ofxa problem-
prone city.
Inferences derived from the study of the covariances surrounding a selected
social problem should be cautiously interpreted. Because these conditions are
correlated to differing degrees with the presence of a particular problem, pre-
dictions can be made to a limited extent. For instance, if location and potential
discrimination are correlated, should more concentrated intervention strategies
be applied to these locations? The answer depends not only on the strength of
the correlation, but also on the nature of any additional covariances.
5. Known causes. Known causes of social problems are fundamentally dif-
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

ferent from environmental covariances. Causes are more elusive than covari-
ances, which are correlations that may (or may not) occur simultaneously with
the social problem. Causes are much more difficult to pinpoint, as there must
be a definitive, nonexceptional link between the cause and the social problem.
By the study of historical social problems, perceived causes may be inferred by
past interventions, though great care must be taken in interpreting these records.
But all too often these studies reveal a history of failed or only temporarily
successful intervention.
For the minority of causes which are known, classification as either chronic
or precipitating causes assists in the selection of an intervention. Chronic prob-
lems tend to produce persistent effects and, in addition, can be more distal than
precipitating causes. Precipitating causes are of an immediate nature and tend
to be more proximate in their occurrences. Classification of causality is useful
for the proper selection of a possible intervention, and indeed may lead to the
clarification of the actual social problem.
These, then, are the five categories of information that should be considered
in the information search process. It is proposed that the sum total of this
information will aid the researcher in determining the appropriate level (i.e.,
societal, group, or individual) for the application of intervention strategies. In
our example of racial discriminationin the labor force, societal level interventions
have already been enacted (i.e., legislationprohibiting discrimination).However,
to the extent that such regulations are found to be unenforceable (e.g., do not
provide adequate penalties or incentive for change), interventions on the next
level (groups), might be applied. Thus, change agents might target a few key
organizations to implement equal opportunity policies for hiring and promoting
employees. Success in a few major corporations might, in itself, stimulate other
companies to change without direct intervention (i.e., modelling effects), or the
experience in situ might provide the information needed to reformulate societal
(i.e., legislative) interventions. In either case, the research process will have had
direct impact on social problems by stimulating social action, and social psy-
chologists will at last contribute directly applicable, useful results, in addition
to theoretical knowledge to the society that supports us.
 REFERENCES

Fuller, R. C., & Myers, R. R. The natural history of a social problem. American Sociological
Review, 1941, 6 , 320.
Kitsuse, J. I., & Spector, M. Toward a sociology of social problems: Social conditions, value
judgments, and social problems. Social Problems, 1973, 20, 407-419.
Mayo, C. Task force on 'What is a social issue.' SPSSI Newsletter, May 1979 (No. 149).
Platt, J. Social traps. American Psychologist. 1973, 641-51.
Rappaport, L., & Kren, G. What is a social issue? American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 838-841.
Ryan, W. Blaming the victim. New York: Pantheon Books, 1971.
Singer, J. L. Task force on 'What is a social issue'. SPSSI Newsletter, May 1979 (No. 149).
Weinberg, M. S., & Rubington, E. The solution of socialproblems: Fiveperspectives. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1973.
Downloaded by [University of Cambridge] at 19:39 16 June 2016

Wilson, W. C. Pornography: The emergence of a social issue and the beginning of psychological
study. Journal of Social Issues, 1973, 29, 7-17.