Abstract
Research on strengths-based positive interventions (SBPIs) has often supported their effectiveness, but these studies overwhelmingly focus on experiential outcomes such as affect and subjective well-being. Much less is known about their effectiveness for eliciting positive behavioral outcomes. The current article provides a lexicon to clarify distinctions between various types of positive interventions. This is followed by a meta-analysis of studies examining behavioral outcomes from SBPIs. Multiple databases were searched through October 2020. Out of 418 studies evaluating what could be considered SBPIs, only 48 analyses across 29 articles examined group differences in a behavioral outcome. Random-effects meta-analysis of post-test data revealed a small to medium, statistically significant effect, Hedges’ g= 0.32. Evidence was insufficient to suggest small-study or methodological bias. SBPIs seemed effective for eliciting behavioral change relative to control conditions consistent with prior meta-analyses. However, the available data are too limited to support SBPIs as an alternative to traditional approaches that focus on direct symptom reduction.
Publisher
International Journal of Wellbeing
Subject
Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous),Applied Psychology,Social Psychology
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献