ABSTRACT

Current research funding models for health psychologists tend to be biased toward support for large-scale ‘definitive’ behavioural trials. This approach emphasizes rigorous tests of one or more key questions, but, unintentionally, may lead to the funding of interventions that are based on myriad untested assumptions. We propose that future funding models should provide support for ‘iterative’ research that tests assumptions at each stage of the intervention development process, including design, deployment, efficacy, implementation, and sustainability. More funding should be allocated to these developmental stages with funding allocated to testing the efficacy of definitive trials only when it is appropriately supported by research that indicates that key assumptions have been met. This shift should foster more robust behavioural interventions that have appropriate efficacy and effectiveness, and ‘work’ in the ‘real world’ contexts. Funders should support assumption testing using a diversity of methods (e.g., qualitative, quantitative, expert consensus), and encourage behavioural researchers to adjust their assumptions according the data produced. We contend that time is now to shift funding models to support assumption-testing research and ensure that funding applications for research testing ‘definitive’ behavioural trials has clear evidence supporting underlying assumptions.

摘要

当前的健康心理学家研究资助模式倾向于支持大规模的“确定性”行为试验。这种方法强调对一个或多个关键问题的严格测试，但无意中可能会导致为基于无数未经测试的假设的干预措施提供资金。我们建议未来的资助模式应该为“迭代”研究提供支持，这些研究在干预开发过程的每个阶段测试假设，包括设计、部署、功效、实施和可持续性。应为这些发展阶段分配更多资金，只有在表明已满足关键假设的研究适当支持时，才应分配资金用于测试最终试验的功效。这种转变应该促进更强有力的行为干预，这些干预措施具有适当的效力和有效性，并在“现实世界”环境中“起作用”。资助者应支持使用多种方法（例如，定性、定量、专家共识）进行假设测试，并鼓励行为研究人员根据产生的数据调整他们的假设。我们认为现在是时候改变资助模式以支持假设测试研究，并确保用于研究测试“确定性”行为试验的资助申请有明确的证据支持潜在的假设。并鼓励行为研究人员根据产生的数据调整他们的假设。我们认为现在是时候改变资助模式以支持假设测试研究，并确保用于研究测试“确定性”行为试验的资助申请有明确的证据支持潜在的假设。并鼓励行为研究人员根据产生的数据调整他们的假设。我们认为现在是时候改变资助模式以支持假设检验研究，并确保用于研究测试“确定性”行为试验的资助申请有明确的证据支持潜在的假设。