Applying a Socio-Ecological Framework to Thematic Analysis Using a Statewide Assessment of Disproportionate Minority Contact in the United States

Abstract

Disproportionate minority contact (DMC) in the United States represents a critical social challenge to promoting the ideals and values of social justice. The ecological nature of DMC, a phenomenon emerging from the intersection of micro- and macro-level factors, necessitates the application of systems theories in understanding the issue and designing solutions to address it. This article illustrates the application of socio-ecological systems theory in thematic analysis, drawing associations across multiple systems between contributing factors to DMC in the juvenile justice system in North Carolina, USA. Analysis examined data from 6 focus groups comprised of 55 statewide stakeholders involved in the juvenile justice continuum. Application of socio-ecological systems theory in thematic analysis revealed structural and individual conditions associated with DMC, to include institutional racism demonstrated by biases present in stakeholders across schools and the juvenile justice system. The article presents ways in which micro to macro factors influence social challenges. Findings present an analytic strategy for constructing a practical model in qualitative research of contributing mechanisms to DMC and addressing issues of social justice in the United States.

A Systematic Review of the Protective and Risk Factors Influencing the Mental Health of Forced Migrants: Implications for Sustainable Intercultural Mental Health Practice

“…This explained how different individual and environmental factors determine health behavior in individuals (McLeroy et al 1988). It is a useful framework since it conceptualizes human development by placing the individual into the centers of circles surrounding it, highlighting the interrelationship of multiple determinants of development and interactions at the personal, relational, and collective levels within this dynamic socio-ecological environment (Henderson and Baffour 2015;Kilanowski 2017). With this framework, there is an assumption that individual decisions and behaviors are determined by reciprocal interactions within and between the social and physical environment of individuals.…”

“…With this framework, there is an assumption that individual decisions and behaviors are determined by reciprocal interactions within and between the social and physical environment of individuals. Simultaneously, individuals contribute to their social ecology in terms of constructing norms, beliefs, and culture across multiple macro-systems (Henderson and Baffour 2015). Intrinsically, the SEM states that individual level behavior is shaped by multiple environmental factors and vice-versa, recognizing the important social environmental and biological factors that either cultivate or inhibit individual attitudes and behaviors (Wong et al 2017).…”

Facilitators and barriers influencing weight management behaviours during pregnancy: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research

“…The factors identified in this synthesis speak to inter-related influences and levels, which can be understood using the socioecological model. This model states that there is no one single factor influencing people’s health, and it sees health levels as the interaction among many factors at five different levels [ 54 ]. The five different levels are 1) individual, including knowledge, attitude and skills; 2) interpersonal, including family, friends and social networks; 3) organizational, including social institutions; 4) community, including relationship between organizations and 5) public policy, including national, state, local and legal regulations[ 54 ].…”

“…This model states that there is no one single factor influencing people’s health, and it sees health levels as the interaction among many factors at five different levels [ 54 ]. The five different levels are 1) individual, including knowledge, attitude and skills; 2) interpersonal, including family, friends and social networks; 3) organizational, including social institutions; 4) community, including relationship between organizations and 5) public policy, including national, state, local and legal regulations[ 54 ]. Hence, this framework highlights the importance of including all these levels in intervention design in order to address all the social determinants of health involved in a certain issue.…”

Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and gender diverse and queer ( LGBTQ ) community members' perspectives on palliative care in New South Wales ( NSW ), Australia

“…The SEM has been applied widely to understand barriers and facilitators to care, including for healthy eating (Townsend, 2013 ) and breastfeeding obstacles (Bueno‐Gutierrez & Chantry, 2015 ). The model is useful to frame research relating to social justice, health, behavioural health and public policy (Henderson & Baffour, 2015 ). Davidson et al articulated the SEM, in relation to palliative care and cultural diversity, theorising how ‘individual, provider and healthcare systems can influence how culture impacts on palliative care services and uptake’ (Davidson et al, 2016 , p. 13).…”