Theory-based explanation as intervention

Abstract

Cogent explanations are an indispensable means of providing new information and an essential component of effective education. Beyond this, we argue that there is tremendous untapped potential in using explanations to motivate behavior change. In this article we focus on health interventions. We review four case studies that used carefully tailored explanations to address gaps and misconceptions in people's intuitive theories, providing participants with a conceptual framework for understanding how and why some recommended behavior is an effective way of achieving a health goal. These case studies targeted a variety of health-promoting behaviors: (1) children washing their hands to prevent viral epidemics; (2) parents vaccinating their children to stem the resurgence of infectious diseases; (3) adults completing the full course of an antibiotic prescription to reduce antibiotic resistance; and (4) children eating a variety of healthy foods to improve unhealthy diets. Simply telling people to engage in these behaviors has been largely ineffective-if anything, concern about these issues is mounting. But in each case, teaching participants coherent explanatory frameworks for understanding health recommendations has shown great promise, with such theory-based explanations outperforming state-of-the-art interventions from national health authorities. We contrast theorybased explanations both with simply listing facts, information, and advice and with providing a full-blown educational curriculum, and argue for providing the minimum amount of information required to understand the causal link between a target behavior and a health outcome. We argue that such theory-based explanations lend people the motivation and confidence to act on their new understanding.

The Magic of Mechanism: Explanation-Based Instruction on Counterintuitive Concepts in Early Childhood

“…Furthermore, from preschool onward, children become increasingly discerning about the insights that they can yield, preferring not only explanations to descriptive factual statements (e.g., Alvarez & Booth, 2015) but also simple, broad, and inference-generating explanations to unparsimonious, circular, illogical, or factually questionable ones (e.g., Bonawitz & Lombrozo, 2012; Corriveau & Kurkul, 2014; Doebel, Rowell, & Koenig, 2016; Samarapungavan, 1992). Finally, they show greater curiosity and learning from explanations that elaborate causal connections or involve generalizable mechanistic processes compared with those that are more basic, for example, invoking only immediate causal antecedents (e.g., Frazier et al, 2016; Kelemen et al, 2014; Weisman & Markman, 2017; see also Mills, Danovitch, Rowles, & Campbell, 2017).…”

“…Furthermore, similar explanation-based interventions have been found to influence not only children’s reasoning within the classroom but also their behavior outside of it: For example, third graders who were taught a coherent mechanism of germ transmission—one involving the counterintuitive causal notion that unobservable bacteria and viruses are alive—not only made accurate inferences about risky health behaviors but also were more likely than control groups to actively wash their hands before food preparation (Au et al, 2008; Weisman & Markman, 2017). Likewise, kindergarteners made healthier snack choices after hearing storybooks presenting a coherent theory of nutrition (Gripshover & Markman, 2013; see also Nguyen et al, 2011).…”

Investigating Science Together: Inquiry-Based Training Promotes Scientific Conversations in Parent-Child Interactions

“…Specifically, we explore delivery of scientific content via two different pedagogical approaches they could use when participating in a scientific activity with their child. The first, a scientific inquiry –based approach, seeks to leverage children’s intuitive drive for seeking explanations through question-asking ( Callanan and Oakes, 1992 ; Kelemen et al, 2014 ; Frazier et al, 2016 ; Weisman and Markman, 2017 ) by guiding them through a process of asking questions, experimenting, and explaining results. Scientific inquiry approaches have been extensively explored and promoted in formal educational contexts (e.g., National Research Council [NRC], 1996 , 2001 , 2007 ; Minner et al, 2010 ; Furtak et al, 2012 ) and hold promise in informal learning contexts as well ( Gutwill and Allen, 2010 ; Vandermaas-Peeler et al, 2016 , 2017 , 2018 ).…”

Doing the Same Thing and Expecting a Different Outcome: It Is Time for a Questioning Philosophy and Theory-Driven Chiropractic Research

“…In this regard, although research involving big data is necessary, smaller-scale qualitative studies fostered through an overarching theory-driven approach may be also useful in bridging the knowledge gap and helping us understand better, for example, how the chiropractor/patient relationship results in greater satisfaction than reported with so many other types of interventions, even when other previously thought important outcomes are not improved. 3,139 Those in support of traditional chiropractic philosophy should acknowledge all truths revealed through a questioning philosophy and theory-driven approach, and not adhere dogmatically to unsupported thinking after it has been disproven or remains unproven.…”