Editorial

Abstract

Psychology requires new heuristics for intervention research and reporting. There are problems with evidence-based practice (EBP) and with publications reporting intervention studies in Psychology. These issues are connected. EBP is associated with unsustainable levels of Waste, Inertia, Invalidity, Simplisticity and Opacity. Eleven domains of behaviour change are defined which encompass a vast array of programmes, interventions and techniques. These procedures are delivered in a multitude of combinations enabling millions of different interventions in Psychology. Reporting an intervention study in Psychology is a complex operation. A taxonomy for intervention reports is described. Journal of Health Psychology

Protecting the power of interventions through proper reporting

“…5,6,12,13,18 Meta-analysis moderator analyses statistically examine associations between intervention characteristics (e.g., content, dose) and outcome effect sizes. These analyses can identify intervention attributes linked with better or worse outcomes across multiple primary studies.…”

“…Scholars struggle to advance theory when inadequately described interventions cloud interpretation of how interventions worked or why they were ineffective. 7,11,12,19 …”

“…18 They provide a shorthand of sorts for reporting intervention content, which helps limit variability and make interventions directly comparable across studies. 12,18 Attempts to classify interventions have been undertaken in areas including behavioral health, 12,18 but are insufficient to explain the complexity of nursing interventions. The Nursing Interventions Classification (NIC) system, while specific to interventions that nurses perform, was not designed as a taxonomy for research interventions.…”

“…5,10,13 It may be of particular use to publish procedural manuals or study protocols in this fashion. 12,13 Another possibility is to make the materials available upon request from an author. 5,13 This option is less desirable because investigators often lose access to materials over extended time periods or may exit careers making the content difficult to locate.…”

“…Authors, reviewers, and journal editors are responsible for maintaining high standards of research reporting in order to achieve these goals. 6,12 …”