Is It Necessary to Discuss Person‐Oriented Research in Community Psychology?

Abstract

A brief overview of the person orientation is provided. It is then argued that research in community psychology, similar to every other field in psychology, has mainly focused on variables, not individuals. Suggestions are provided for how the person orientation can be applied to understanding settings and environments as well as the theoretical and methodological contributions community psychologists can make to further person oriented methods.

Then and now: A 50‐year retrospective thematic analysis of Society for Community Research and Action presidential addresses

“…Heller (1989) asked where the community was in community psychology, contending that community concepts were not well‐defined and that the field was limiting itself by not studying community. Two decades later, Anne Bogat (2009) critiqued the individual‐level methodological approach that community psychology had adopted from the broader discipline, calling for methodologies that measured changes in settings and systems instead of individuals.…”

Community identity profiles and COVID‐19‐related community participation

“…Given this research gap, our first aim was to adopt a person‐oriented approach, particularly latent profile analysis, to differentiate multiple community identifiers for the following reasons. Methodologically, community psychologists have increasingly advocated a person‐oriented approach (e.g., cluster analysis, latent class analysis and latent profile analysis) in review articles and used it in empirical research (e.g., Bogat, 2009 ; Christens, Collura, & Tahir, 2013 ; Yang & Xin, 2016b ; Yoo, 2019 ). Following this research line, we used this method to examine the heterogeneity in community identity.…”

“…Following this research line, we used this method to examine the heterogeneity in community identity. Practically, such heterogeneity is vital for community organizers and administrators because they tend to think the scientific findings of “categories” or “types” of people more appealing and much easier to understand than relationships among variables (e.g., Bogat, 2009 ; Christens et al, 2013 ; Yang & Xin, 2016b ). In this regard, our findings might benefit community professionals if they need to design differential intervention programs targeting specific community identifiers amid the COVID‐19 outbreak.…”

The Prevalence and Typologies of Controlling Behaviors in a General Population Sample

“…Although a variable-oriented approach can be highly informative, IPV research can also benefit from using a person-oriented approach (Bergman, 2001;Bergman & Magnusson, 1997;Bogat, 2009;Magnusson, 1999;Magnusson & Torestad, 1993). As stated by Bergman a person-oriented approach 'emphasized that the thoughts, feelings, and behaviour of individuals, cross-sectionally as well as developmentally, are best understood in terms of complex dynamic systems ' (2001, p.30).…”

“…Bogat, Levendosky, and Eye (2005) underlined how most IPV research has adopted a variable-oriented approach, focusing on understanding the relationship among variables, for instance, in terms of protective or risk factors, while paying limited attention to interindividual differences. Although a variable-oriented approach can be highly informative, IPV research can also benefit from using a person-oriented approach (Bergman, 2001; Bergman & Magnusson, 1997; Bogat, 2009; Magnusson, 1999; Magnusson & Torestad, 1993). As stated by Bergman (2001), a person-oriented approach “emphasized that the thoughts, feelings, and behaviour of individuals, cross-sectionally as well as developmentally, are best understood in terms of complex dynamic systems” (p. 30).…”