IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v53y2001i6p801-816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the methodological, theoretical and philosophical context of health inequalities research: a critique

Author

Listed:
  • Forbes, Angus
  • Wainwright, Steven P.

Abstract

The integration of survey data with psycho-social theories is an important and emerging theme within the field of health inequalities research. This paper critically examines this approach arguing that the respective models of health inequality which these approaches promote, the related concepts of 'social cohesion' and 'social capital' suffer from serious methodological, theoretical and philosophical flaws. The critique draws particular attention to the limitations of survey-derived data and the dangers of using such data to develop complex social explanations for health inequalities. The paper discusses wider epistemological issues which emerge from the critique addressing the fundamental but neglected question of 'what is inequality'? The paper concludes by introducing a structure for questions regarding health inequalities emphasising the need for those question to be attached to real communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Forbes, Angus & Wainwright, Steven P., 2001. "On the methodological, theoretical and philosophical context of health inequalities research: a critique," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 801-816, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:53:y:2001:i:6:p:801-816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(00)00383-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shortt, S. E. D., 2004. "Making sense of social capital, health and policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(1), pages 11-22, October.
    2. Mansyur, Carol & Amick, Benjamin C. & Harrist, Ronald B. & Franzini, Luisa, 2008. "Social capital, income inequality, and self-rated health in 45 countries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 43-56, January.
    3. Cash-Gibson, Lucinda & Martinez-Herrera, Eliana & Benach, Joan, 2021. "What key conditions and mechanisms generate health inequalities research in different contexts? Study protocol for two realist explanatory case studies," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    4. Wakefield, Sarah E.L. & Poland, Blake, 2005. "Family, friend or foe? Critical reflections on the relevance and role of social capital in health promotion and community development," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(12), pages 2819-2832, June.
    5. Rainham, Daniel, 2007. "Do differences in health make a difference? A review for health policymakers," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(2-3), pages 123-132, December.
    6. Durie, Robin & Wyatt, Katrina, 2007. "New communities, new relations: The impact of community organization on health outcomes," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(9), pages 1928-1941, November.
    7. Carpiano, Richard M., 2006. "Toward a neighborhood resource-based theory of social capital for health: Can Bourdieu and sociology help?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 165-175, January.
    8. Kritsotakis, George & Vassilaki, Maria & Chatzi, Leda & Georgiou, Vaggelis & Philalithis, Anastassios E. & Kogevinas, Manolis & Koutis, Antonis, 2011. "Maternal social capital and birth outcomes in the mother–child cohort in Crete, Greece (Rhea study)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(11), pages 1653-1660.
    9. Bosma, H. & Van Jaarsveld, C. H. M. & Tuinstra, J. & Sanderman, R. & Ranchor, A. V. & Van Eijk, J. Th. M. & Kempen, G. I. J. M., 2005. "Low control beliefs, classical coronary risk factors, and socio-economic differences in heart disease in older persons," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 737-745, February.

    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:53:y:2001:i:6:p:801-816. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.