User:AS5694/sandbox

This is the user sandbox of AS5694. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here.

Other sandboxes: Main sandbox | Template sandbox

Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!

Brickman’s 4 models of helping

Introduction

Brickman’s four models of helping highlight two factors affecting helping behaviour: who is responsible for a problem’s cause and for its solution (Brickman et al., 1982). They comprise: the moral model, compensatory model, medical model and the enlightenment model (Brickman et al., 1982). The theory highlights the assumptions of individuals and institutions around helping (Brickman et al., 1982). This may encourage greater critique about where responsibility lies and how individuals should be helped. The four models were influenced by research assuming individuals prioritised understanding the causes of events when assigning responsibility (Fincham & Jaspars, 1980). Other prior research suggested that the primary aim was to protect one’s ego (Zuckerman., 1979).

Brickman and colleagues argued that people were more interested in controlling behaviour to achieve desired outcomes (Brickman et al., 1982). They proposed that individuals attempted to control certain behaviours by assigning responsibility for them, to highlight that rewards and punishments were conditional (Brickman et al., 1982). For example, those who feel morally responsible for an event may have greater self-esteem if the outcome of this event is positive (Schwarts., 1977), and thereby are more likely to strive for a positive outcome. While information about Brickman’s 4 models exists, there is no description on Wikipedia, and scarce research has critically discussed it. This essay will outline and critically discuss the theory.

The moral model

In the moral model, individuals are considered responsible for both causing and solving their problems and are seen as requiring motivation (Brickman et al., 1982). For instance, drinking is viewed as a weakness due to a lack of self-control (Brickman et al., 1982). A downfall of this model is that it may dismiss individuals who make significant efforts to solve their problems, yet cannot. The model would assume that any such effort is insufficient or misdirected, blaming the individual (Brickman et al., 1982). Research has shown that participants consider relief to the lowest and middle class significantly fairer than relief for the highest class (Brickman & Stearns, 1978). Although the type of relief varied between classes, this demonstrates the consensus that individuals with less resources require more assistance (Brickman & Stearns, 1978). Therefore, the model may overlook differences in resources, which affect the requirement of aid. Notably, the study also found that participants favoured investments to the upper class over relief given to them (Brickman & Stearns, 1978). Hence, the moral model may benefit from acknowledging the distribution of aid via investment in infrastructure, services etc; a more indirect and long-term means of providing aid.

On the other hand, a positive use of the moral model is that it may motivate individuals who can solve their problems to take accountability for them (Brickman et al., 1982). Alternatively, if individuals can solve the problems they are responsible for but choose not to, the model can discourage them from blaming others (Brickman et al., 1982). Reviews have suggested that stress-coping and adaptive outcomes are more likely when individuals feel more control over their outcomes (Averill, 1973; Brickman et al., 1982), providing support for the moral model, especially in elderly populations (Rodin., 1986). However, neither of these studies formally distinguish between responsibility for problems and for their solutions (Karuza et al., 1990). Future research may wish to distinguish between these factors, to assess the efficacy of both aspects of the moral model. Research has found that giving people greater freedom of choice in key presses can lead to greater feelings of control over the outcome of a pleasant or unpleasant chord (Barlas., 2018). This suggests that increasing or emphasising individuals’ freedom could encourage them to take responsibility for their problems. This may enhance the efficacy of the moral model in certain situations; a direction for future research.

The compensatory model

The compensatory model assumes that individuals are not responsible for causing their problems but are responsible for solving them; they require power (Brickman et al., 1982). They are expected to compensate for their unfortunate circumstance by putting in extra effort, collaborating with others, or finding an original solution (Brickman et al., 1982). This model primarily blames the individual’s environment for not providing sufficient resources (Brickman et al., 1982). They are seen as requiring assistance from peers or training in how to adapt to their environment (Brickman., 1982). The model encourages individuals to focus on solving a problem or adapting their environment without blaming themselves or others (Brickman et al., 1982). However, it may overlook individuals who may struggle to solve their problem alone. For example, a characteristic feature of depression is reduced motivation (Smith., 2013). Therefore, a depressed individual may lack the motivation required to solve their problems, necessitating clinical intervention.

The notion that an individual is responsible for solving the problem they did not cause may be seen as inequitable, placing them under unnecessary stress (Brickman et al., 1982). Researchers note that individuals who constantly feel responsible for solving problems they did not cause may develop a negative or paranoid view of the world (Brickman et al., 1982). While research indicates that feeling responsible for solutions is associated with improved stress-coping and adaptive outcomes (Averil.,1973; Brickman et al., 1982), other research has found that such feelings are negatively related to adaptiveness (Felton & Kahana., 1974; Rodin et al., 1980). This suggests that the efficacy of the compensatory model may vary depending on the situation- perhaps individuals who continuously apply the model experience stress and find it less adaptive over time. Therefore, this model may be applied only to some situations and in moderation, however future research is needed to confirm.

The medical model

According to the medical model, individuals are not responsible for the causes or resolutions of their problems; they require external intervention (Brickman et al., 1982). This applies to any instance in which a problem is de facto beyond the individual’s control (Brickman et al., 1982). The responsibility held by the individual is to acquire and make use of the help of experts (Arluke et al., 1979; Parsons., 1951; Segall., 1976). They are also expected to make efforts to get well, unless they have an illness which is terminal (Lipman & Sterne, 1969) or chronic (Kassebaum & Baumann., 1965). Nonetheless, the agent deemed responsible for deciding the course of action is the expert (Brickman et al., 1982). For example, a doctor may prescribe pain medications to a patient, who is responsible for taking them. A disadvantage of this view is that many individuals do not have the means to solve their own illnesses, for example, a patient requiring a blood transfusion. Therefore, research may wish to adopt a more flexible approach to the model by placing more responsibility on the expert for executing the solution in certain situations.

A benefit of the medical model is that it allows people to welcome assistance without guilt (Brickman et al., 1982). For example, research has found that childcare professionals who believed that behaviour was rooted in biology and the environment exhibited less punishment towards children with problems (Nettler., 1959). However, all participants were involved in child welfare agencies (Nettler., 1959), so this stance may not be representative of the whole population, who may not be as knowledgeable or understanding of child behaviour. Future research may wish to use more diverse samples and investigate areas outside of childcare. Further, not all issues are entirely determined by forces beyond our control, so the medical model may be inappropriate in such contexts. Research indicates that the more individuals are made to feel dependent on others, the more likely they are to deteriorate in an area where they used to excel (Langer & Benevento., 1978). Therefore, further research may benefit from assessing an individual’s ability to solve their problem alone, before providing expert assistance. Nevertheless, the study above was an artificial lab task (Langer & Benevento., 1978) so does not represent deterioration in a real-life or long-term sense; a potential direction for future research.

The enlightenment model

In this model, the responsibility for a problem’s origins is placed on the individual (Brickman., 1982). However, they are assumed to lack the ability or willingness to solve their problem, thus requiring discipline (Brickman et al., 1982). Under this model, individuals must accept a negative image of themselves and submit to authority to control their impulses (Brickman et al., 1982). This model may be applied to the support group for alcoholics known as Alcoholics Anonymous, where individuals who join have been shown to have a stronger sense of responsibility for their past problems (Trice & Roman., 1970). Research found that those with higher attendance in such sessions were more likely to become abstinent (Moos & Moos., 2004) and feel greater control over avoiding drinking temptations (Connors et al., 2001). While such findings demonstrate the effectiveness of taking accountability, they do not indicate that submission to authority was necessary. Perhaps it was the connections they made with other members that gave them the confidence to resist temptations to drink. Future research may benefit from examining the relative contributions of authority and the individual’s social network, when applying the enlightenment model.

Brickman and colleagues noted that the emphasis on the authority figure as the agent in control in the enlightenment model may leave the individual helpless when the authority figure withdraws support (Brickman et al., 1982). An analysis of treatments for substance-use disorders indicates that those who had longer term treatment/support had a 23.9% higher chance of abstaining or consuming in moderation, compared with those with shorter treatments (Beaulieu et al., 2021). This suggests that a minimum level of intervention may have been required for the best results. However, it was apparent that some individuals still benefited from short-term treatment in the long-term (Baulieu et al., 2012). Hence, the model could emphasise the level of intervention needed to learn sufficient discipline. Further research may wish to compare the effects of intervention on discipline and adaptiveness to problems in different contexts.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Brickman’s four models of helping can be effective in helping individuals to overcome their problems when applied to the appropriate contexts. However, the rigidity of the models may pose problems in their application to complex cases, in which the individual may not be wholly responsible for their problem and/or its solution. The moral model may enable individuals to take accountability (Brickman et al., 1982), making them more adaptive and resilient to stress (Averill, 1973; Brickman et al., 1982). However, when applied to individuals who lack the resources to help themselves, the model may serve to exacerbate existing inequalities (Brickman & Stearns, 1978; Smith., 2013). Future research may wish to investigate the effect of choice freedom on the efficacy of the moral model in situations where individuals can help themselves, and consider investment as a form of aid. The compensatory model is practical in directing individuals’ energy to solving their issue without being blamed for it (Brickman et al., 1982). On the other hand, when over-used or used in contexts where it is difficult to solve a problem alone, it may facilitate stress (Brickman et al., 1982) and inhibit adaptiveness (Felton & Kahana., 1974; Rodin, Rennert & Solomon., 1980). Nevertheless, future research may be required to confirm the situations in which the compensatory model is most effective.

The medical model allows people to welcome assistance without feeling guilty (Brickman et al., 1982). Nonetheless, a more flexible use of the model in which less responsibility is given to the individual for resolving their problem could be investigated. Additionally, an individual’s capabilities could be assessed in a real-life context to ensure that the model is not over-used, which could foster over-dependence, leading to deterioration (Langer & Benevento., 1978). Lastly, the enlightenment model has shown to foster self-discipline, allowing individuals to overcome problems such as substance-use disorders (Connors et al., 2001; Moos & Moos., 2004). Nevertheless, further research could examine the relative contributions of authority and the individual’s social network. Additionally, future research could investigate the most effective levels of intervention in different contexts; this may be particularly valuable in the clinical field.

References

Arluke, A., Kennedy, L., & Kessler, R. C. (1979). Reexamining the sick-role concept: An empirical assessment. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 30-36. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136476

Averill, J. R. (1973). Personal control over aversive stimuli and its relationship to stress. Psychological Bulletin, 80(4), 286–303. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034845

Barlas, Z., Hockley, W. E., & Obhi, S. S. (2018). Effects of free choice and outcome valence on the sense of agency: evidence from measures of intentional binding and feelings of control. Experimental Brain Research, 236(1), 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5112-3

Beaulieu, M., Tremblay, J., Baudry, C., Pearson, J., & Bertrand, K. (2021). A systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of the long-term treatment and support of substance use disorders. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 285, 114289–114289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114289

Brickman, P., Rabinowitz, V.C., Karuza, J. J., Coates, D., Cohn, E., & Kidder, L. (1982). Models of helping and coping. American psychologist, 37(4), 368. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.4.368

Brickman, P., & Stearns, A. (1978). Help that is not called help. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4(2), 314-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/014616727800400230

Connors, G. J., Tonigan, J. S., & Miller, W. R. (2001). A longitudinal model of Intake symptomatology, AA participation and outcome: Retrospective study of the Project MATCH outpatient and aftercare samples. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62(6), 817–825. https://doi.org/10.15288/jsa.2001.62.817

Felton, B., & Kahana, E. (1974). Adjustment and situationally-bound locus of control among institutionalized aged. Journal of Gerontology (Kirkwood), 29(3), 295–301. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/29.3.295

Fincham, F. D., & Jaspars, J. M. (1980). Attribution of responsibility: From man the scientist to man as lawyer. Advances in experimental social psychology, 13, 81-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60131-8

Karuza, J., Zevon, M. A., Gleason, T. A., Karuza, C. M., & Nash, L. (1990). Models of Helping and Coping, Responsibility Attributions, and Well-Being in Community Elderly and Their Helpers. Psychology and Aging, 5(2), 194–208. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.5.2.194

Kassebaum, G. G., & Baumann, B. O. (1965). Dimensions of the sick role in chronic illness. Journal of health and human behavior, 16-27. https://doi.org/10.2307/2948615

Langer, E. J., & Benevento, A. (1978). Self-induced dependence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(8), 886. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-3514.36.8.886

Lipman, A., & Sterne, R. S.(1969) Aging in the United States: Ascription of a terminal sick role. Sociology and Social Research, 53, 194-203

Moos, R. H., & Moos, B. S. (2004). Long-Term Influence of Duration and Frequency of Participation in Alcoholics Anonymous on Individuals With Alcohol Use Disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.72.1.81

Nettler, G. (1959). Cruelty, dignity, and determinism. American Sociological Review, 24 (3), 375-384. https://doi.org/10.2307/2089386

Parsons, T. (1951) The social system. New York: Free Press

Rodin, J., Rennert, K., & Solomon, S. K. (2013). Intrinsic motivation for control: Fact or fiction. In Advances in environmental psychology (pp. 131-148).

Schwartz, S. H. (1977). Normative influences on altruism. In Advances in experimental social psychology, 10, 221-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60358-5.

Segall, A. (1976). The Sick Role Concept: Understanding Illness Behavior. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 17(2), 162–169. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136342

Smith, B. (2013). Depression and motivation. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 12(4), 615–635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11097-012-9264-0

Stepleman, L., Darcy, M. A. U., & Terence, T., (2005). Helping and Coping Attributions: Development of the Attribution of Problem Cause and Solution Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 65, 525-542. 10.1177/001316440427249.

Trice, H. M., & Roman, P. M. (1970). Sociopsychological predictors of affiliation with alcoholics anonymous a longitudinal study of “treatment success”. Social Psychiatry, 5, 51-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01539796

Zuckerman, M. (1979). Attribution of success and failure revisited, or: The motivational bias is alive and well in attribution theory. Journal of Personality, 47(2), 245–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1979.tb00202.x