Conceptual and Methodological Considerations in Evaluating Preventive Interventions

Environmental approaches and prevention: The dangers of imprecision

“…Although in disagreement with Cowen over the relative merits of deemphasizing secondary relative to primary preventive interventions (Lorion 1983(Lorion , 1984Lorion & Lounsbury, 1982), I agree entirely with his conclusion that the looseness with which activities are claimed as examples of "prevention" represents a major threat to the field's ultimate credibility with both consumers and policy makers. Furthermore, this looseness undermines seriously the likelihood that its promise to reduce the prevalence of mental disease and psychological disorder will be kept.…”

“…(Lorion, 1983, p. 257;italics added) The basis for what some might label a "conservative" stance toward intervention research is a growing conviction that the cost of an unsuccessful premature intervention strategy must be weighed carefully against its potential benefit. As described elsewhere (Lorion, 1983(Lorion, , 1984Lorion &Lounsbury, 1982;Lorion, Work& Hightower, 1984) those costs include the possibility that policy makers may misinterpret the negative findings as evidence that prevention or promotion strategies do not work and therefore should be denied further support. Furthermore, the iatrogenic potential of preventive and promotive interventions cannot be overlooked and should not be minimized.…”

The basic academic skills enhancement program: Translating prevention theory into action research

“…Although this spread of effects is a foreseeable characteristic of prevention research (Lorion, 1983;Lorion & Lounsbury, 1982), it represents a formidable challenge to those attempting to evaluate program outcomes and the differential contributions of program components to those outcomes. Although this spread of effects is a foreseeable characteristic of prevention research (Lorion, 1983;Lorion & Lounsbury, 1982), it represents a formidable challenge to those attempting to evaluate program outcomes and the differential contributions of program components to those outcomes.…”

“…As noted elsewhere (Lorion, 1983;Lorion & Lounsbury, 1982)' the bottom-line measure of the value of a preventive intervention is evidence that reductions have occurred in the incidence of targeted disorders. To assess this, BASE researchers are monitoring certification rates for each of the disorders of interest in all of the system's elementary schools.…”

Perceptions of classroom environment and their relationship to children's mood, achievement, popularity and adjustment

“…The essential "generaThis study was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH 14574-04) and the New York State Department of Education. That suport is acknowledged with gratitude, as are the contributions made by Ellis L. Gesten and Evelyn Arlas Segal. 0278-095X{82) 1500-0018502.75 18 01982 Human Sciences Press tive base" (Cowen, 1980;Lorion & Lounsbury, 1981} provided by such information makes it possible to build true primary prevention programs in environmental modification. This study is designed to contribute to such a generative base by exploring relationships between perceptions of elementary level classroom environments and the functioning of their pupil-inhabitants.…”