Unipolar depression across cultures: A Delphi analysis of the methodological and conceptual issues confronting the cross-cultural study of depression

M. Redmond, R. Rooney, B. Bishop
{"title":"Unipolar depression across cultures: A Delphi analysis of the methodological and conceptual issues confronting the cross-cultural study of depression","authors":"M. Redmond, R. Rooney, B. Bishop","doi":"10.5172/jamh.5.2.113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The objective of the research is to investigate the epistemological and methodological discrepancies involved in the cross-cultural study of unipolar depression. These discrepancies include the methodological design and measurement of depression and culture, and the epistemological variation in researchers as to whether depression is a universal or socially constructed phenomenon. A Delphi procedure was utilised which enabled a group of eleven culture/depression experts from around the globe to respond to an open-ended questionnaire related to the methodological and epistemological problems confronting the understanding of depression across cultures. Endorsement of these issues and consensus between the Delphi participants to these issues was then assessed by two subsequent questionnaires. The results indicated that when studying depression across cultures, both universal and social constructionist approaches to depression need to be considered. Quantitative measures of depression should include only the universal aspects of depression so meaningful comparisons can be made across cultures. Quantitative information should be supplemented with qualitative descriptions from research collaborators who can provide an emic perspective of depression. Measuring culture should move beyond the scope of using Hofstede’s dimensions which, although measuring some aspects of culture, do not encompass the complexity of cultures. The impact of globalisation means that our knowledge of cultures needs to be regularly reviewed. Cross-cultural, comparative research of depression is much needed but there are many methodological and epistemological issues that need to be addressed.","PeriodicalId":358240,"journal":{"name":"Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5172/jamh.5.2.113","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Abstract The objective of the research is to investigate the epistemological and methodological discrepancies involved in the cross-cultural study of unipolar depression. These discrepancies include the methodological design and measurement of depression and culture, and the epistemological variation in researchers as to whether depression is a universal or socially constructed phenomenon. A Delphi procedure was utilised which enabled a group of eleven culture/depression experts from around the globe to respond to an open-ended questionnaire related to the methodological and epistemological problems confronting the understanding of depression across cultures. Endorsement of these issues and consensus between the Delphi participants to these issues was then assessed by two subsequent questionnaires. The results indicated that when studying depression across cultures, both universal and social constructionist approaches to depression need to be considered. Quantitative measures of depression should include only the universal aspects of depression so meaningful comparisons can be made across cultures. Quantitative information should be supplemented with qualitative descriptions from research collaborators who can provide an emic perspective of depression. Measuring culture should move beyond the scope of using Hofstede’s dimensions which, although measuring some aspects of culture, do not encompass the complexity of cultures. The impact of globalisation means that our knowledge of cultures needs to be regularly reviewed. Cross-cultural, comparative research of depression is much needed but there are many methodological and epistemological issues that need to be addressed.
跨文化的单极抑郁症:对抑郁症跨文化研究中方法论和概念问题的德尔菲分析
摘要本研究旨在探讨单相抑郁症跨文化研究中的认识论和方法论差异。这些差异包括抑郁症和文化的方法设计和测量,以及研究人员对抑郁症是普遍现象还是社会建构现象的认识论差异。利用德尔菲程序,来自全球的11位文化/抑郁症专家回答了一份开放式问卷,该问卷涉及跨文化理解抑郁症所面临的方法论和认识论问题。对这些问题的认可和德尔菲参与者对这些问题的共识,然后通过随后的两份问卷进行评估。结果表明,在跨文化研究抑郁症时,需要考虑普遍的和社会建构主义的抑郁症研究方法。抑郁症的定量测量应该只包括抑郁症的普遍方面,以便在不同文化之间进行有意义的比较。定量信息应辅以研究合作者的定性描述,他们可以提供抑郁症的整体观点。测量文化应该超越使用Hofstede的维度的范围,虽然测量文化的某些方面,但不包括文化的复杂性。全球化的影响意味着我们的文化知识需要定期回顾。抑郁症的跨文化、比较研究是非常必要的,但有许多方法论和认识论问题需要解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信