Moving from information transfer to information exchange in health and health care
Introduction
The past several decades have been marked by debate over the success of health education and promotion practices aimed at changing the health behaviors of individuals and groups. Health communication practices and frameworks are largely based on the assumption that changes in individual knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs will translate into changes in behavior. These efforts imply a unidirectional, uncomplicated, and linear flow from information creator to information user, and from the scientific/technical setting to the social contexts of individual lives. They likewise assume that merely providing information is sufficient to produce improved health outcomes in individuals and populations, and that individuals, regardless of social context, have the power and agency to implement change and to act on information as it is made available. While there has been increased questioning of the effectiveness of such an approach in health and health care, few workable alternatives have been proposed.
Using data from three field studies, this paper shows how such commonly accepted views of health communication are inadequate because they imply a one-way transfer of information based on a one-sided relationship between communicator and receiver. We outline the limits of such approaches by critiquing three key problems inherent in health information transfer: (1) a focus on the individual, (2) the privileging of expert over lay perspectives, and (3) the assumption that a one-way flow of information, from provider to recipient, is appropriate. By examining how information moves about in settings as diverse as patient/provider encounters, health promotion programs, and national health policymaking, our paper illustrates the pervasiveness of such existing health information practices across very different health contexts. We conclude by suggesting that researchers and practitioners must move beyond traditional practices of information transfer (based on a ‘monologue’) toward a more useful and appropriate concept of information exchange (based on a ‘dialogue’) as a first step in reorienting health communication practices currently in place.
Section snippets
Background
In recent years, critical theoretical approaches have increasingly been applied in health contexts (Lupton, 1998; Robertson, 1998; Bunton, Nettleton, & Burrows, 1995; Fox, 1994). While many researchers have moved forward on theoretical issues related to health, there has been a concurrent call for the application of critical concepts in empirical settings (Moss, 1997). In response, researchers have employed critical approaches to uncover meanings behind taken-for-granted health actions and
Information transfer in multiple contexts: three studies
The following three case studies were originally designed to understand decision-making processes of individuals and groups in various health contexts. None of the studies were meant to examine information flows per se; however, the key theme of one-way information transfer resonated throughout each study, calling for our collective re-examination of each project in light of this new understanding. Taken individually, the studies represent doctor–patient encounters, public health programming,
Discussion
The three case studies presented here represent diversity in health contexts, geographical areas, and how the various providers and users of information were positioned in the hierarchy of health communication. However, the cases show a remarkable similarity in their underlying problems. Each showed how health communication practices remain firmly rooted in the individualist ethic—information providers focused on individual determinants of health and assumed that individual behavior change is
Moving from information transfer to information exchange
Our analysis has shown the limitations of the dominant approach to information transfer, and how practices based on this approach are pervasive—firmly rooted in multiple levels of health practice, promotion, and policy. We propose that traditional health communication, based on the monologue of information transfer, can and should be replaced by a more appropriate concept of information exchange, based on two-way dialogue. Using the concept of ‘exchange’ as opposed to ‘transfer’ is a powerful
Acknowledgements
The cases discussed here were supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship #752-97-1065), the Eco-Research Program in Environmental Health at McMaster University, the McMaster Research Centre for the Promotion of Women's Health, the Virginia Tech Graduate Research Development Program, and the Quinnipiac University Faculty Research Grant-in-Aid Program. The authors extend a special thanks to the women of Fairmount County and the researchers and
References (66)
Empowering patientsIssues and strategies
Social Science & Medicine
(1996)- et al.
Using the patient-centered method to achieve excellence in care for women with breast cancer
Patient Education and Counseling
(1999) - et al.
Decision-making in the physician–patient encounterRevisiting the shared treatment decision-making model
Social Science & Medicine
(1999) - et al.
What is participatory research?
Social Science & Medicine
(1995) - et al.
Paternalism, patient autonomy, and moral deliberation in the physician-patient relationshipAttitudes with Norwegian physicians
Social Science and Medicine
(2001) - et al.
Public health responses for skin cancer preventionThe policy framing of sun safety in Australia, Canada and England
Social Science & Medicine
(2001) - et al.
Social capital and health promotionA review
Social Science & Medicine
(2000) Social capital and healthImplications for public health and epidemiology
Social Science & Medicine
(1998)A postmodern public health?
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
(1998)Negotiating spaces in home environmentsOlder women living with arthritis
Social Science & Medicine
(1997)