After 670 pages of critically analyzing scientific evidence from a range of disciplines, Sapolsky boils down his book, and thereby human behavior, into a single phrase: “It’s complicated”.

It’s complicated because biological, psychological, and cultural aspects of behavior are so intertwined that they can’t be distinguished. Although his book begins with the brain, Sapolsky shows us that this is not where behavior begins, but rather where the many factors that influence behavior converge to create behavior. His detailed analysis takes us from individual neurobiology to social systems, from fetal development to adulthood, and from evolutionary factors millions of years ago to current day.   

Humans act based on emotion and cognition, which work together to keep us functioning normally in our social world. Context and culture shape not only how we behave, but how our behavior is perceived and defined – whether moral or immoral, prosocial or antisocial, violent or protective.  And a different world can create a different worldview, which in turn can mean a different brain and different behavior.

While Sapolsky’s focus in this book is to unravel the complexity of human behavior, he also underscores why our work in the social sector is so important – and provides some insights into how we might approach social and behavior change. Here are three key takeaways.

1. Inequality hurts us all.

“In terms of its caustic, scarring impact on minds and bodies, nothing in the history of animals being crappy to one another about status differences comes within light-years of our invention of poverty.”

Research shows that societies with more income inequality have less social capital. People in these societies are less healthy, less likely to vote, less kind, and less likely to help each other. They experience more crime, violence, and bullying. Creating a more equitable society requires fostering a culture of cooperation, minimizing us vs. them dichotomies, and promoting shared rights and values.

We must find ways to demonstrate that an equitable society benefits everyone, and increase understanding of our shared humanity. Sapolsky provides some interesting examples of how facilitated interaction of diverse groups and putting a face to those perceived as “others” can help change negative perceptions and create social connections. Focusing on common concerns, values, and benefits rather than differences can build bridges and promote collaboration. For example, the University of Michigan Program on Intergroup Relations has been working   on addressing social conflict and promoting social justice through intergroup dialogue.

2. Childhood matters.

“While little in childhood determines an adult behavior, virtually everything in childhood changes propensities toward some adult behavior.“

While stress in during crises can be lifesaving, chronic and psychological stress is detrimental to health. Adverse childhood experiences increases the likelihood of an adult having depression, anxiety, substance abuse, impaired cognitive capabilities, impaired impulse control and emotional regulation, and antisocial behavior (including violence). However, many children who experience adversity turn into well functioning adults due to protective factors that build resilience.

We should continue to focus on creating safe, stable, nurturing environments for children. This can be through intervention and support for parents, as well as programs and policies that foster a protective and positive community that can help children grow to their full potential. For evidence-based strategies and resources, check out CDC’s Essentials for Childhood Framework.

3. Doing the right thing isn’t always easy.

“It’s great if your frontal cortex lets you avoid temptation, allowing you do the harder, better thing. But it’s usually more effective if doing that better thing has become so automatic that it isn’t hard.”

Humans have a desperate need to conform, belong, and obey, which can be a negative thing when we choose to follow the crowd instead of do what’s best or right. People are more likely to resist temptation when doing the right thing has become the natural reflex, the easy thing to do. They can also be persuaded by guilt or shame (internal or external). Therefore, we need to create a culture in which doing the right thing is the norm – and not doing the right thing can have negative feelings or repercussions.

We can use social marketing campaigns like Let’s Move to promote healthy behaviors by making them fun, easy, and popular. We can also advocate for policies that reward positive behavior (e.g. tax credits for electric cars) and deter unsafe behavior (e.g. fines for not using seatbelts). Sapolsky points out though that some social issues are harder to address than others, for example violence. Because our culture frequently rewards aggression and normalizes violence through media, it creates ambiguity towards violent behavior, making it contextual rather than inherently right or wrong. Therefore, addressing violence requires significant shifts in cultural norms and values – not just education campaigns and policy changes.

Formative research is a critical step in developing communications programs and campaigns, and can be useful for all types of program development.

Why? Because we need to deeply understand the audience that we are trying to engage and determine what it’s going to take to achieve the impact we want.

And that means going beyond gathering statistics and demographics.

It requires answering some fundamental questions about the audience:

• What are their motivations and needs related to the issue we are trying to address?
• How do they understand and think about the issue?
• Who is going to be able to spark and influence the action we want to see?
• When and how should we engage them in our program?
• Where and how can we really make a difference?

Getting this level of insight isn’t easy. Getting it through formal research is even harder.

Now, that may seem counterintuitive. Isn’t structured, rigorous research the best way to gather information? Not necessarily – especially, if you are trying to build that deep understanding to help you drive change.

Let me explain.

There are some benefits to conducting formal research:

• It is systematic and structured, providing a clear and straightforward process.
• It can be peer-reviewed and results of the research can be published.

But there are also some significant costs:

1. Literally – it’s expensive! Did you know the average cost of a focus group is $5,000?
2. It takes significant time and effort to plan, implement, analyze research. Have you ever been through an IRB process?
3. It’s difficult to get honest, meaningful insight through formal methods because, well, they are rarely conducted in real-life situations and appropriate context. How often do you meet up with 6 random strangers in an office building to talk about your health concerns? And if you do, how open and forthcoming are you going to be?
4. Most formal research methods don’t let you dig deep enough to really understand motivation and decision-making processes, especially when we are talking about sensitive or controversial issues. Those that do, take lots of time, effort, and money (see above).

I’m not suggesting that we shouldn’t do formal research. I’m recommending we take a broader, more informal, approach to gathering formative insight.

Take advantage of every valid opportunity to collect and triangulate information. Don’t just trust what someone tells you on a survey or in an interview – listen to what people are saying in informal conversations, watch what they do in social situations, and ask those insiders what they think is going on.

For example, when I was working on intimate partner violence prevention, we conducted focus groups, interviews, and surveys to gather the data we needed to design our program. Pretty standard best practice. However, we quickly realized that the people who were willing to participate in our research were not representative of the broader community we needed to engage in our program. We also discovered that, because the topic was one that was sensitive and not widely acknowledged, we were not getting completely open and honest information.

Fortunately, we had a number of community members who were part of our planning team. They were able to share their own insight as well as gather “insider” information through informal conversations with a wide range of community members and observation of interpersonal and community dynamics (which they recorded in a journal). We used both sets of information – formal and informal – to create a fuller, more accurate picture of how this community understood, perceived, and dealt with intimate partner violence as well as how best to help prevent it.

So, back to the original question. Is formative research really that important? I’d say it is…especially if we can redefine it as formative insight.

For more ideas on how to use research and insight to plan more effective programs, contact Aparna@devipartners.com.

Research is about learning – it helps us discover new things, form new ideas, and expand our understanding of the world. But what if research could do more than that?

Participatory action research (PAR) shows us that it certainly can. By working hand-in-hand with communities to gather information, reflect on it, and create solutions, action reearch goes beyond learning – it activates change.

There are 3 key ways in which PAR is fundamentally different from traditional research.

1. There are no subjects here! Traditional research has “subjects”; in PAR, participants take the lead in planning, conducting and analyzing research for their own use. Rather than collecting information from participants, the process builds capacity and knowledge among participants.
2. Will the real experts please stand up? Traditional research calls for detached and objective experts; in PAR, participants themselves are seen as the experts because they have deep knowledge and insight – and a stake in gathering relevant, practical data.
3. Research can BE the change. The goals of PAR are not just to gather and analyze information, but to engage the community in thinking together to find practical solutions. Not only does the process create ownership and commitment to address issues of common concern, but it can itself change attitudes and perceptions.

PAR has been used around the world to work on issues ranging from health and environment to community development and occupational safety. Here is an example of a project I worked on to combine participatory action research with social marketing to prevent intimate partner violence.

There are a range of ways to gather information in PAR. Some are similar to methods used in traditional research, such as surveys, interviews, focus groups. Others are less structured, informal means of getting insight.

• See for yourself: Observation in natural settings provides deep insight into behavior and culture.
• Ask the experts: Every community has formal and informal leaders, those who understand what makes people tick, how things work, and how to get things done.
• Dive deep: Case studies allow us to take a deeper dive into a particular issue, effort, or community.
• Map it out: Mapping is a great tool for understanding how a community is organized and how different areas are perceived.
• Draw it out: Diagramming can identify important individuals and institutions within in a community and their relationships and influence.
• Act it out: Participatory theatre, photo/video projects, and other art forms can be used to identify and analyze problems as well as explore solutions.

While PAR may not be as expensive as formal research, it can be resource intensive because it requires time, engagement, and broad community effort. But, it can be very impactful for those very same reasons. To learn more about PAR and how to use it to create change in your community, contact Aparna@devipartners.com.

Photo Credit