IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v279y2021ics0277953621003166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Moderated mediation analyses to assess intervention mechanisms for impacts on victimisation, psycho-social problems and mental wellbeing: Evidence from the INCLUSIVE realist randomized trial

Author

Listed:
  • Melendez-Torres, G.J.
  • Warren, Emily
  • Viner, Russell
  • Allen, Elizabeth
  • Bonell, Chris

Abstract

Realist evaluations aim to evaluate interventions by understanding the mechanisms they trigger, assessing not merely what works but what works for whom, under what conditions, and how. Significant disagreement in the literature exists as to whether randomized trials can be used as a tool for realist evaluation. INCLUSIVE, which was the first realist randomized trial explicitly designed as such, evaluated the impact of Learning Together, a school-based intervention for students aged 12–15 that included restorative practice, on bullying victimisation, mental wellbeing and psychological problems. Drawing on hypotheses generated through qualitative research, this analysis tested if school belonging was a mediator of intervention effects, and in which contexts. We estimated a series of fully longitudinal multilevel moderated mediation models including intervention allocation, student reports of school belonging at 24 months and victimisation and wellbeing outcomes at 36 months, and stratified on the basis of whether, at baseline, schools were: a) rated ‘outstanding’ for leadership, b) below the median for average levels of victimisation, and c) above the median on school inclusivity. Findings suggested that in unstratified models, belonging was not a mediator for any outcome; but in each of the strata defined above, belonging was a significant mediator at the student level. However, in the strata where belonging was not a mediator, the intervention still had a significant effect on each outcome. Analyses point to a strong but conditional role for belonging as a mediator of intervention pathways; in schools where belonging was not a mediator (e.g. above-median victimisation levels), other mechanisms may have been activated. This is consistent with a realist understanding of context-mechanism linkages generating outcomes. Our analyses suggest that realist evaluations can be pursued within randomized trials and that such analyses can offer more nuanced evidence regarding in which contexts interventions might effectively be implemented.

Suggested Citation

  • Melendez-Torres, G.J. & Warren, Emily & Viner, Russell & Allen, Elizabeth & Bonell, Chris, 2021. "Moderated mediation analyses to assess intervention mechanisms for impacts on victimisation, psycho-social problems and mental wellbeing: Evidence from the INCLUSIVE realist randomized trial," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:279:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621003166
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953621003166
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113984?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bonell, Chris & Fletcher, Adam & Morton, Matthew & Lorenc, Theo & Moore, Laurence, 2012. "Realist randomised controlled trials: A new approach to evaluating complex public health interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2299-2306.
    2. Markham, Wolfgang A. & Aveyard, Paul, 2003. "A new theory of health promoting schools based on human functioning, school organisation and pedagogic practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1209-1220, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wolfgang A. Markham & Alan Dolan & Graham F. Moore, 2021. "A Sociological Framework to Reduce Aberrant Behaviour of School Students Through Increasing School Connectedness," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, July.
    2. Hawe, Penelope & Riley, Therese & Gartrell, Alexandra & Turner, Karen & Canales, Claudia & Omstead, Darlene, 2015. "Comparison communities in a cluster randomised trial innovate in response to ‘being controlled’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 102-110.
    3. Mulhall, Peter & Taggart, Laurence & Coates, Vivien & McAloon, Toni & Hassiotis, Angela, 2018. "A systematic review of the methodological and practical challenges of undertaking randomised-controlled trials with cognitive disability populations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 114-128.
    4. Warren Pearce & Sujatha Raman, 2014. "The new randomised controlled trials (RCT) movement in public policy: challenges of epistemic governance," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(4), pages 387-402, December.
    5. Humphreys, David K. & Eisner, Manuel P., 2014. "Do flexible alcohol trading hours reduce violence? A theory-based natural experiment in alcohol policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-9.
    6. Busse, Heide & Campbell, Rona & Kipping, Ruth, 2018. "Examining the wider context of formal youth mentoring programme development, delivery and maintenance: A qualitative study with mentoring managers and experts in the United Kingdom," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 95-108.
    7. Hatcher, Abigail M & McBride, Ruari-Santiago & Rebombo, Dumisani & Munshi, Shehnaz & Khumalo, Mzwakhe & Christofides, Nicola, 2020. "Process evaluation of a community mobilization intervention for preventing men’s partner violence use in peri-urban South Africa," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    8. Saab, Hana & Klinger, Don, 2010. "School differences in adolescent health and wellbeing: Findings from the Canadian Health Behaviour in School-aged Children Study," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 850-858, March.
    9. Mélanie Villeval & Elsa Bidault & Jeannie Shoveller & François Alias & Jean-Charles Basson & Catherine Frasse & Jean-Paul Génolini & Elisabeth Pons & Damien Verbiguié & Pascale Grosclaude & Thierry La, 2016. "Enabling the transferability of complex interventions: exploring the combination of an intervention’s key functions and implementation," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 61(9), pages 1031-1038, December.
    10. Louise Persson & Katarina Haraldsson & Curt Hagquist, 2016. "School satisfaction and social relations: Swedish schoolchildren’s improvement suggestions," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 61(1), pages 83-90, January.
    11. Legrand, Karine & Minary, Laetitia & Briançon, Serge, 2018. "Exploration of the experiences, practices and needs of health promotion professionals when evaluating their interventions and programmes," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 67-72.
    12. Graham F. Moore & Rebecca Cox & Rhiannon E. Evans & Britt Hallingberg & Jemma Hawkins & Hannah J. Littlecott & Sara J. Long & Simon Murphy, 2018. "School, Peer and Family Relationships and Adolescent Substance Use, Subjective Wellbeing and Mental Health Symptoms in Wales: a Cross Sectional Study," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 11(6), pages 1951-1965, December.
    13. Dan Bristow & Lauren Carter & Steve Martin, 2015. "Using evidence to improve policy and practice: the UK What Works Centres," Contemporary Social Science, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(2), pages 126-137, June.
    14. Margaret Dalziel, 2018. "Why are there (almost) no randomised controlled trial-based evaluations of business support programmes?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    15. Ligia Kiss & David Fotheringhame & Joelle Mak & Alys McAlpine & Cathy Zimmerman, 2021. "The use of Bayesian networks for realist evaluation of complex interventions: evidence for prevention of human trafficking," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 25-48, May.
    16. Elovainio, Marko & Pietikäinen, Minna & Luopa, Pauliina & Kivimäki, Mika & Ferrie, Jane E. & Jokela, Jukka & Suominen, Sakari & Vahtera, Jussi & Virtanen, Marianna, 2011. "Organizational justice at school and its associations with pupils’ psychosocial school environment, health, and wellbeing," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(12), pages 1675-1682.
    17. Schreuders, Michael & Nuyts, Paulien A.W. & van den Putte, Bas & Kunst, Anton E., 2017. "Understanding the impact of school tobacco policies on adolescent smoking behaviour: A realist review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 19-27.
    18. Gyeongcheol Cho & Younyoung Choi & Ji-Hyun Kim, 2020. "Investigating the Unintended Consequences of the High School Equalization Policy on the Housing Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-9, October.
    19. Roman Pabayo & Michel Janosz & Sherri Bisset & Ichiro Kawachi, 2014. "School Social Fragmentation, Economic Deprivation and Social Cohesion and Adolescent Physical Inactivity: A Longitudinal Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-12, June.
    20. Massazza, Alessandro & May, Carl R. & Roberts, Bayard & Tol, Wietse A. & Bogdanov, Sergiy & Nadkarni, Abhijit & Fuhr, Daniela C., 2022. "Process evaluations of mental health and psychosocial support interventions for populations affected by humanitarian crises," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:279:y:2021:i:c:s0277953621003166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.