Free Thesis Introduction Chapter Sample

Theory

Brief Description

Strengths

Weaknesses

Social ecological model (Bronfenbrenner, 1994).

• The framework describes how an individual’s behaviour is integrated in a network that is dynamic, including intrapersonal characteristics, interpersonal processes, organisational features, community features, and public policy (Salihu et al. 2015).
• The theory depicts that the Interaction between the individual and the environment is reciprocal. An individual is influenced by his/her own environment and vice versa (Salihu et al. 2015).
• It is a framework of working with children, young people, and families to keep them at the centre of anything that is done to support and help them (Claire, 2016).

• Explains behaviour based on different levels of factors.
• Designed to explain behaviour.
• Designed for health promotion and education.
• Supports policies and laws that regulate or support healthy practices.
• The organisational level of the framework explains how rules, regulations, and structures constrain or promote behaviours.
• Applies to the study, considering a gym is a wellness intervention that is implemented to help and support individuals to keep a healthier life.

• Does not generally apply to workers; it applies only to children, young people, and families in the social context.
• Mainly looks at issues within the home and family context and not organisational issues.
• Does not demonstrate how behaviour is shaped by the organisational environment.

Social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1989).

• Originally called the social learning theory (Bandura, 1989).
• It is positioned as a theory of human behaviour and is used to understand human behaviour in a variety of settings (Beauchamp et al. 2018).
• Focuses on what people learn by observing others and how this may or may not impact their behaviours.

• Designed to explain behaviour.
• Used to explain physical activities
• Handles inconsistencies in behavior easily
  Provides an accurate illustration explaining how behavior is learned.
• It is optimistic, in a good way.
• Easy to understand
• Offers a way to integrate social and cognitive theories.
• It allows and accounts for cognitive processes explaining a large number of behaviors.
• It is a motivational theory.
• Real-world behavioral examples can be applied and can be quickly and easily administered.
• Concerned with important human social behaviors.
• An evolving theory that is open to change
• Focus on important theoretical issues such as the role of support or reward in learning.
• Addresses how reinforcement and punishment, as well as self-efficacy, affect how individuals work to attain a specific goal, as well as motivation.

(Meissler 2012).

• Does not clearly demonstrate how behaviour is shaped by the organisational environment.
• Does not take into account physical and mental changes.
• Doesn’t explain all behavior since thoughts and feelings are influenced by many internal and external factors.
• Doesn’t explain behavioral differences.
• Doesn’t take into account that what one person views as punishment/unsupportive, another person may view as a reward/supportive.
• Does not explain why individuals respond differently to similar situations.
• Ignores maturation as well as lifespan behavior changes.
• Ignores hormonal responses and biological differences.

(Meissler 2012).

Human capital theory (Smith 1976).

• A framework that examines the relationship between social well-being, education, and economic growth (Netcoh 2016).
• The theory indicates that expenditure made on job training, education, and health is a capital investment that is bound to produce social and economic returns at both the individual and societal level (Netcoh 2016).
• Assumes that education and training lead to greater productivity, which is translated to economic and work-related returns (Netcoh 2016).

• Beneficial to the well-being of individuals
• Views people as an important component of societal and economic wealth, as well as individual and business well-being
• Explains how improvement in human capital leads to increased wages, GDP, as well as work-related outputs
• Helps researchers as well as policymakers understand the relationship between education and training as inputs and social and economic returns/ benefits as outputs.
• It provides an important lens that one can use to understand how policy can be improved and developed to incentivize individuals’ investment in their own education.
• Useful for answering questions on the kinds of investments that are most productive and understanding optimal levels of individual/social investments in education
• Useful for understanding costs and benefits for individual investments in education
• Useful for understanding types of policy interventions that reduce individual costs associated with educational investments.
• Martinez 2018; Netcoh 2016).

• View of human beings as objects of productivity.
• Assumes education increases productivity in the workplace, resulting in higher earnings and work outputs
• Provides little insight into the processes through which education and training are translated into productivity and higher wages.
• Does not account for other factors that contribute to productivity at the workplace in terms of work outputs and wage increases.
• Targets gender, race, and class discrimination.
• Closed system modelling
• Use of a single theoretical lens as well as a closed system modelling (Marginson 2017; Martinez 2018; Netcoh 2016).

Job-demands resources theory (Demerouti et al. 2001).

• The job-demands resource model assumes that the health and well-being of employees in an organization result from a balance between positive (resources) and negative (demands) job characteristics (Schaufeli and Taris 2014).
• Represents a way of thinking about how job characteristics may influence employee health, well-being, and motivation (Schaufeli and Taris 2014).

• Does not restrict itself to specific job demands and job resources
• Assumes that any demand and any resource may affect employee health and well-being.
• Its scope is much broader than other models, such as the job demand control model and the effort reward imbalance model.
• More flexible and can be tailored to a wider variety of work settings.
• Used to understand organizational issues that contribute to employee wellbeing, health, and motivation.

(Schaufeli and Taris 2014).

• Job demands may relate differently to specific outcome variables.
• Specifies what kind of personal and job characteristics lead to a particular psychological state as well as outcome, but does not indicate why this would be so.
• The conceptual difference between job demands and job resources is not as clear-cut as it may seem at first glance.
• Proposes straightforward unidirectional causal relations among resources, demands, and outcomes, but other studies have demonstrated reciprocal causation.

(Schaufeli and Taris 2014).