NCJ Number
157455
Date Published
1995
Length
12 pages
Annotation
This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of the three main paradigms that guide prevention research: organicism, mechanism, and contextualism.
Abstract
Organicism is the world view that underlies developmentalism. The root metaphor of organicism is the integrated or developed organism. The analyst influenced by organicism views events in terms of their progress through stages toward an integrated whole. Organicism has prompted researchers to identify typical developmental sequences and to organize crime and drug prevention efforts to reduce the risk factors that contribute to problematic development. The organizing metaphor for mechanism is the machine. Under this paradigm the world is viewed as a machine with interrelated parts. For the mechanism paradigm, the criterion for the truth or validity of an analysis is predictive verification. Mechanism has encouraged researchers to search for generalizable models of the interrelationships among behavioral variables and randomized control trials of prevention programs. The root metaphor of contextualism is the act in context. Contextualist analysis begins with the event experienced as a whole in and with its context. For a contextualist, every event is unique. When contextualism focuses on the goal of prediction and influence of the phenomenon under study, it is likely to identify interventions that can be used to prevent problems of concern to communities and other social units. This paper discusses the strengths and weaknesses of each of these three paradigms. 23 references