Program Logic Modelling and Complex Positive Psychology Intervention Design and Implementation: The ‘Resilient Futures’ Case Example

Abstract

Positive psychology interventions (PPIs) and programs differ markedly in implementation quality. Lower quality implementation is associated with interventions that include multiple components (or PPIs), are delivered across multiple layers (individual, workgroup/ classroom and organisation/school) or agency sites, and include cohorts with heterogeneous or complex needs (e.g., trauma). This paper collectively refers to these interventions as 'complex PPI's' or 'complex programs'. Drawing upon the implementation science literature, we argue that logic modelling represents a method to guide the design and implementation of 'complex' interventions. We describe a growth-focused logic model and implementation methodology (titled intentional practice) that operationalises positive psychology outcomes and processes to support program developers to achieve a balance between fidelity and adaptation. The Resilient Futures program, developed by the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI) Wellbeing and Resilience Centre, is described as a case example of the approach. This program represents a large scale and multi-site implementation of a resilience and wellbeing skill-building program for 850 young people from disadvantaged backgrounds with heterogeneous needs. The case study describes how logic modelling and intentional practice consolidated early theory building work to operationalise the intervention at the program level, but also to support multi-site nuancing and translation of the program to individual sites and agency/youth needs. The article argues that logic modelling offers a flexible and evidence-based method for program designers, facilitators and researchers to design and implement complex PPI's or programs. Key considerations for utilising logic models are offered.

Fostering Positive Communities: A Scoping Review of Community-Level Positive Psychology Interventions

“…Even though some positive psychology models have been proposed to explain how programs achieve their objectives (e.g., Lyubomirsky and Layous, 2013 ; Raymond et al, 2019 ), current practices make it difficult to develop a comprehensive logic model of positive psychology interventions. It has been argued, for example, that current positive psychology interventions are conceived as cohesive units of activity, which limit their development and evaluation (Raymond et al, 2019 ; Pawelski, 2020 ). Through our scoping review, we found that researchers present logical connections between intervention objectives and target populations, but that there is a lack of cohesion and reasoning behind activities implemented and some of the target outcomes measured.…”

“…Our analysis of objectives and target outcomes showed that authors were mostly interested in distal positive effects of interventions on different types of well-being [reducing depression] rather than proximal effects on character strengths [developing optimism to then reduce depression]. Even though some positive psychology models have been proposed to explain how programs achieve their objectives (e.g., Lyubomirsky and Layous, 2013;Raymond et al, 2019), current practices make it difficult to develop a comprehensive logic model of positive psychology interventions. It has been argued, for example, that current positive psychology interventions are conceived as cohesive units of activity, which limit their development and evaluation (Raymond et al, 2019;Pawelski, 2020).…”

“…Through our scoping review, we found that researchers present logical connections between intervention objectives and target populations, but that there is a lack of cohesion and reasoning behind activities implemented and some of the target outcomes measured. The analysis of the different constitutive elements and processes involved in an intervention would allow for a better understanding of the specific elements essential for effective positive change in different contexts (Raymond et al, 2019;Pawelski, 2020). Interestingly, most outcomes were considered either overall, physical, interpersonal or psychological well-being, or a character strength.…”

Using the Intervention Mapping Approach to Develop a Mental Health Intervention: A Case Study on Improving the Reporting Standards for Developing Psychological Interventions

“…The needs analysis firstly draws on an extensive study of the scientific literature on mental health and wellbeing interventions. Secondly, it is underpinned by findings and data (published and unpublished) from previous wellbeing studies our research group conducted across population groups including in the general community, within workforces such as health professionals, with older adults, carers, and disadvantaged youths (Raymond et al, 2018(Raymond et al, , 2019van Agteren et al, 2018a;Bartholomaeus et al, 2019). All data that was being used to underpin the needs analysis was subject to ethics approvals issued by the Flinders University Social and Behavioural Research Ethics Committee (SBREC), project numbers (PN) 7834, 7891, 7350, 7358, 7221, 7218, and 8579. The IM framework uses the PRECEDE-PROCEED model (Gielen et al, 2008) to summarise and structure the results of the needs analysis into an actionable logic model.…”

Resilient futures: An individual and system-level approach to improve the well-being and resilience of disadvantaged young Australians.

“…Within the reorientation of the Resilient Futures program, a program logic model was developed to articulate a hierarchy of short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes, which were categorized against the domains of youth, agency, and agency system. An article has been submitted detailing the scientific evidence underpinning the program logic modeling as a method to support the design and implementation of complex positive psychology programs, including the Resilient Futures program (Raymond, Iasiello, Kelly, & Jarden, 2018). The logic model also articulates the key program components.…”