A RT I C L E

PARADIGMS OF COMMUNITY
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY IN SIX
LATIN AMERICAN NATIONS
Esther Wiesenfeld
Universidad Central de Venezuela
Caracas, Venezuela
■

In this article, we present the general theoretical orientations (concepts,

theories, and paradigms) as well as methodologies and techniques which
have guided the work of community social psychologists in six Latin
American countries: Brazil, Chile, Colombia, México, Puerto Rico, and
Venezuela. The analysis is based on the review of the state of the art of
community social psychology in those countries (Sánchez & Wiesenfeld,
1991; Wiesenfeld & Sánchez, 1995). This article presents an important,
although nonexhaustive overview, of the development of the discipline on our
continent. This analysis allowed us to (a) identify some common goals of
community intervention programs, as well as in the principles which guide
them; and (b) to explore the possibilities of integrating them into a coherent
model that organizes community work and hopefully, stimulates further
development of the discipline. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

INTRODUCTION
Community psychology (CP), or community social psychology (CSP) as it is known in
Latin America, is a relatively young discipline. It began in the United States in 1965,
largely as a result of psychologists’ dissatisfaction with the way psychology as a discipline
was dealing with mental health problems. There were concerns about the limitations of
the prevailing paradigm in psychology for responding to social injustice.
Newbrough (1992) distinguishes three stages in the development of CP.

• Stage 1: 1965–1975. The Swampscott conference in 1965 is given credit for the of-
ficial birth of the discipline. During this period, the definition of community psy-

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Esther Wiesenfeld, Universidad Central de
Venezuela, Apdo. 47018, Caracas 1041-A, Venezuela.

JOURNAL OF COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY, Vol. 26, No. 3, 229–242 (1998)

© 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. CCC 0090-4392/98/030229-14
230 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

chology and models for training community psychologists were considered. These
training models were discussed at the Austin Conference in 1975. That meeting
ended the first stage and permitted the development of alternative teaching strate-
gies.
• Stage 2: 1975–1989. A preventative approach to community mental health prob-
lems, especially those of disadvantaged groups, was combined with an ecological
perspective.
• Stage 3: 1989. This stage has three main characteristics: (a) It shows a greater con-
sideration of social problems and an interdisciplinary approach to them; (b) the
knowledge which was generated in the earlier stage became integrated into pro-
fessional practice; (c) it centered on people’s adaptation to the environment and
not on the idea of the mutual adjustment between both of them, a more truly eco-
logical perspective.

Traditional psychology is based on faith in authority and social systems rather than
on faith in people. It assigns people to social ranks and does not assume their right to
diversity and to equal access to psychological and material resources. Reacting to this
stance, Rappaport (1981) offered a new paradigm that emphasized the importance of
people having equality of opportunity and greater power and control over their own
lives. Earlier, Rappaport (1977) argued that in the social sciences, because there can be
more than one way to understand problems, there can therefore be more than one par-
adigm. In contrast, Kuhn (1975) stated that paradigms are incompatible with each oth-
er since each new paradigm, by definition, supersedes the existing one in explaining rel-
evant problems. I agree with Rappaport in his flexible use of the term “paradigm.” It is
obviously impossible at the beginning to have access to the body of knowledge that is
necessary for consolidation of a paradigm. Rappaport uses the terms “frames,” “models,”
“orientations,” and “paradigms” interchangeably.

PARADIGMS IN COMMUNITY PSYCHOLOGY

Because initially no paradigm can solve the problems from which it arose, it is interest-
ing to examine the achievements of a different paradigm for community, from different
perspectives. In an analysis of the present state of community psychology in the United
States, Newbrough (1992) says that this discipline has only recently focused attention on
specific social problems such as AIDS and homelessness, with the dual intent of solving
problems and generating knowledge. Although these dual objectives were voiced at the
Swampscott conference in 1965, they do not appear to have been seriously pursued un-
til recently by community social psychology. Both the psychological and the community
components must be integrated within a new theory that offers an interdisciplinary ori-
entation to social problems. Dokecki (1992) offered a concept for this integration that
he calls “person-in-community.” The purpose of this concept is the promotion of the de-
velopment of both the person and their community through the principles of fraterni-
ty, equality, and freedom. Fraternity refers to social and affective development, equality
refers to the resources for growth and development, and freedom refers to the oppor-
tunities for individual growth (see Fig. 1).
Each of the aspects that have been mentioned thus far lead to a redefinition of a
community psychologist as an effective collaborator. Dokecki (1992) describes this role
as a “reflective-generative practitioner” (p. 27), a combination of the reflective practi-
 Paradigms • 231

Type of Inquiry

Scope of Inquire Quantitative/Impersonal Qualitative/Personal

Micro-Level Experimental and functional Interpretive studies

studies
Macro-Level Systems-Analytic studies World-View studies
*Taken From: Paul Dokecki (1992) “On knowing the community of caring persons: A methodological basis for the reflective-
generative practice of community psychology,” Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 26–35.

Figure 1. A human science methodological framework for community psychology. From “On Knowing the
Community of Caring Persons: A Methodological Community Psychology,” by P. Dokecki, 1992, Journal of
Community Psychology, 20, pp. 26–35. Copyright 1992 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Reprinted with permission of
the author.

tioner proposed by Schön (1983) and of the generative theorist described by Gergen
(1978). The practitioner role refers to the intervenor who contributes to people’s well-
being by interchanging the use and generation of knowledge through a transactional ex-
change of action guided by a set of values. (Schön, 1983, p. 20). The strength of the field
is in its social activity.
The implications of this perspective are synthesized in “ . . . the development of a
praxis that contributes to the conceptual, functional, and methodological unification of
the field . . .” (Schön, 1983, p. 21). Until now, the unifying concept that has emerged
with greatest force is “empowerment” proposed by Rappaport (1981). Newbrough (1991)
suggested that one should think beyond the idea of liberty and include fraternity and
equality. He argues for the need to develop a sense of community within this discipline
and to integrate the efforts of training and research that have been separated until now.
The principles that are applied in community interventions can also be used in profes-
sional communities.

METHODOLOGY
Methodologically, Rappaport (1981) advocates the use of multiple procedures. Dokecki
(1992) offers four approaches for the classification of research methods based on two
criteria, the level and the type of inquiry made. Levels of inquiry include both the micro
and macro. The two types of inquiry are quantitative/impersonal and qualitative/personal.
The micro/quantitative is represented by evaluation research—the micro/qualitative by
phenomenology. The first of these corresponds to experimental and functional studies
and to cost-effectiveness analysis. These studies help community psychology to determine
the causal relationships between variables. They are characteristic of traditional research
methods in psychology. The micro/qualitative studies, by contrast, involve interpretative
and phenomenological methodologies and other qualitative approaches. These investi-
gatory strategies permit the understanding of meanings, intentions, and interpretations
of community situations. For the most part, this line of inquiry has been followed by hu-
manistic psychologists.
Macro/quantitative designs depend on the use of multivariate quantitative methods
that can be applied to a community or an organization. These methods expand our un-
derstanding of how networks or systems work. Such issues have defined the problems on
232 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

which many community psychologists have worked. Macro/quantitative studies also re-
fer to the examination of world views that explain social and political systems. In such
studies, values and ideologies are contrasted. Dokecki (1992) believes that psychologists
have avoided this macro/quantitative approach. These methodological variations corre-
spond to different paradigms. Dokecki defends the use of different paradigms by saying
that community psychologists have to approach their object of study through multiple
methods because of the complexity of the phenomena with which they work. However,
he does not consider the epistemological and ontological characteristics of the para-
digms in which each methodology belongs.
Newbrough, on the other hand, argues for the integration of two basic paradigms of
community—Gemeinschaft and Gesselschaft, into a third paradigm that is a combination of
the two. This integration combines liberty, equality, and fraternity and translates them
into freedom, justice, and interdependence (Newbrough, 1991). Dokecki’s (1992) posi-
tion is based on support for paradigmatic and methodological pluralism. Newbrough ap-
parently agrees with this. This is questionable, given the three criteria that Guba (1990)
assigned to the meaning of a paradigm. In Guba’s view, the ontological, the epistemo-
logical, and the methodological criteria refer, respectively, to the ways we construct our
knowledge of reality, the nature of reality we are trying to know, and the ways to get clos-
er to this knowledge.
Does all this imply that it is possible to combine aspects from different paradigms
and then to include them in a new one to increase the comprehension and the solution
of problems? Any attempt to answer this question would be ambitious. Nevertheless, it
is possible to look for answers by analyzing what community psychology does in a spe-
cific region, for example, in Latin America where the discipline has developed on its
own. This article seeks to describe the theoretical orientations that guide the activities
of community psychologists in different Latin American countries from an analysis of
community interventions and theoretical work and identify commonalities that might
provide for integrations.

COMMUNITY SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

IN LATIN AMERICA
In Latin America, social psychologists have promoted a change in their discipline, in re-
sponse to the questioning of the 1970s. By emphasizing the application of knowledge in
the solution of social problems, professionals had to move from the academy to the so-
cial context in which problems occurred. The focus of their work emphasized the dis-
advantaged groups who are the object of study. The objectives are to promote changes in
adverse conditions. Their strategies include consciousness-raising, empowerment, and
control over the environment. Montero (1984) defines community social psychology as
“ . . . the area of psychology whose objective is to study the psychosocial factors that al-
low people to develop, promote, and maintain the control and the power that they have
over their social and individual environments, so that they can solve their problems and
make the changes that they want to in those environments and their social structures”
(p. 390).
Of the many experiences that professional social psychologists have had with com-
munities, it is notable that the applied emphasis has had a negative effect on the theo-
retical development of this discipline. The activities of the community social psycholo-
gist are those of a committed facilitator and a serious thinker who collaborates with the
 Paradigms • 233

groups. One’s knowledge and commitment to the community help community members
to organize and to actively participate in solving their problems. The facilitator does this
by making people become aware of their position in society, and then to question it. This
is based on the methodology of participatory action-research. The question is whether
the theoretical foundations that guide these experiences belong to only one paradigm.
Earlier, I have shown that work done in the Latin American countries of Brazil,
Colombia, Chile, Mexico, Puerto Rico, and Venezuela reflected the use of different par-
adigms (Sánchez & Wiesenfeld, 1991). I describe the theoretical bases of these research
efforts and explore the possibilities of integrating them into a coherent model that per-
mits a systematic study of community work and a continuation of the theoretical devel-
opment of this discipline.

Theoretical Orientations
The analysis below is based on the articles published in the special issue of the journal,
Applied Psychology: An International Review (Sánchez & Wiesenfeld, 1991) and in the book,
The Latin American Contributions to Community Social Psychology (Wiesenfeld & Sánchez,
1995).

Brazil
Research carried out in this country can be divided into two stages of contributions to
the historical development of the field. The first stage ended in 1981 at the time of the
First Regional Meeting on Community Psychology in Sao Paulo. The second stage in-
volves research conducted between 1981 and 1988 that was presented at the Second Re-
gional Meeting in Belo Horizonte in 1988. Both meetings were organized by The Brazilian
Association of Social Psychology (ABRAPSO). During Stage 1, there was an emphasis on
adult education influenced by Paulo Freire’s (1974) principles of consciousness-raising
and the conceptualization of problems. It was expected that community organization
and mobilization would be encouraged to solve social problems. Other research focused
on the prevention of clinical problems. These analyses stimulated the participants to
question traditional psychological methods in which people’s needs are fragmented into
such themes as education, learning therapy, and self-awareness. What is common across
these three themes is an appreciation of the relationship between an individual and the
groups to which she or he belongs. This common focus permits one to discover their in-
dividuality, reality, and society. The human being is considered to be a totality, and the
role of psychology is sought in community practice (Lane & Sawaia, 1995).
In Stage 2, techniques for group dynamics are emphasized in order to obtain pop-
ular organization. These techniques are useful for helping groups to develop their aware-
ness, so that they may become capable of controlling their own lives. This happens
through the facilitation of organized group activities. The concept of power is emphasized
in this work and subjectivity is recovered, that is, importance is given to the subjective ex-
perience, as in representations, emotions, and affect, that are considered to define in-
dividuality.
Methodologically, participatory action research is applied as an investigatory strat-
egy which coincides with the ontological and epistemological assumptions of CSP. We
classify these assumptions as belonging to the paradigm of the critical sciences or critical
theories in which reality is ontologically, ideologically, and epistemologically subjective,
234 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

measured by values. The purpose of activity is to prepare the group or members of a

community to function as a collective entity. Through this unification we hope to enable
them to encounter what has been denied, and to prepare the members to confront the
alienation that they experience from their work. Emotions are a mediator for awareness,
and therefore, for the praxis of CSP. In this way, an objective fact turns into psychologi-
cal content that awakens a great amount of emotion. When this emotion is shared among
group members there is an integration of subjectivity and objective.
There are different approaches to participatory research that illustrate how a pro-
fessional intervenor can be incorporated into a community. Research can be seen as a
source of information so that action for change can be planned without necessarily com-
bining research into action. Research can also be designed in such a way that it is in-
separable from action. Research can be used as a strategy for mobilizing and organizing
populations for political purposes. Research can be a moment of reflection and system-
atization of a developing action so that it becomes more efficient. Reflection as part of
the process is used to decide what direction the research will take, to discuss the inter-
pretations that have been made of the data, and to return the information to the com-
munity. Reflection is generally done in small groups using group techniques such as psy-
chodrama or sociodrama. Techniques used for gathering information include qualitative
methods (e.g., life histories, field diaries, open interviews, and focus group interviews).
Surveys and questionnaires can also be used to increase the group’s participation and
representation and to identify its focal issues.
In summary, community social psychology in Brazil searches for the liberation of sci-
ence and the emancipation of persons (Lane & Sawaia, 1991a). Awareness and activity
are confronted and are overcome through reflection. Emotion is considered to be a me-
diator between awareness and praxis. This is a paradigm that comes from Marxist criti-
cal theory (Lane & Sawaia, 1991a,b; 1995).

Colombia
Granada (1991, 1995) has described the difficulties that many professionals, who ap-
preciate the limitations of the positivist paradigm, face when they break away from their
academic training. He argues that both the nature and the magnitude of the social prob-
lems in Colombia, together with the size and characteristics of the population, have re-
quired the search for alternative and unique answers from academics. These social prob-
lems have included: (a) applying nontraditional strategies based on education and
self-directed work and the rejection of institutionalization, to the rehabilitation of drug
addicts with criminal records; (b) the prevention of motor vehicle accidents through re-
search into drivers’ perception and their assumptions about their risk for having an ac-
cident; (c) a critical reconstruction of the participative history of a community; (d) the
increase of community participation through the use of social marketing; (e) ethno-
graphic case study of the meaning of folk medicine that is based on medicinal herbs; (f)
a special health program for school children using needs assessment, reflection, and sen-
sitivity training with parents and children; and (g) the promotion of critical awareness
about a garbage problem in a disadvantaged community in which the community mem-
bers developed their own solution to the problem.
The aforementioned problems all had different origins, but the participation of
community members was a common principle for every solution. Social, economic, po-
 Paradigms • 235

litical, and cultural contexts are proposed as necessary elements that must be understood
in relation to social problems. Even though psychologists participate at the beginning,
and other professionals are incorporated throughout the process, knowledge of com-
munity members is a basic resource.
Granada (1991) argues that community problems should be understood empirical-
ly rather than theoretically. Such problems typically involve situations in which there is
an external and urgent demand for a response that requires a pattern of action that is
usually different from the one a scientist would use. This implies that the participants’ goal
is to produce social change rather than knowledge. Sometimes, an immediate solution
must supersede the use of long-term strategies. The Columbian studies and interventions
were carried out with conventional methods and designs, such as quasiexperimental
strategies, field research, and the use of random sampling or volunteer samples. Tech-
niques such as interviews, surveys, observation protocols, semantic differential scales,
questionnaires, and both qualitative and quantitative analyses were also used. Granada
(1991, 1995) notes that action-research is an ideal, rather than a real goal, because at-
tempts to make the community participate do not usually get beyond the stages of di-
agnosis and planning for action. Consequently, the stages of design, performance, and
evaluation are not really that participatory. This represents a distinct challenge for re-
searchers.
These examples show that the discipline remains attached to the positivist paradigm
in which an external reality is seen as a problem that demands attention. That reality has
been explored through several techniques, and the information that has been collected
is then returned, both to community members for their use and to the agent who re-
quested it. This agent is not necessarily the community. The community can also partic-
ipate in opportunities to identify and reflect on their problems. This program approach
combines a positivist orientation with elements of both a positivist and a critical method-
ology. The critical methodology is based on the principles of Fals Borda’s (1979) par-
ticipatory action-research (IAP) and Freire’s (1974) problematization and consciousness
raising.
The lack of specific information on the theoretical underpinnings of these cases
makes a deeper analysis impossible. Frequently, there has been a contradiction between
the objectives that guided the research and the intervention and the ways in which these
objectives were handled. The objectives are based on the view of the community as the
protagonist. The participants are assumed to have constructed their own reality, and the
praxis is independent of this construction. Is this paradigmatic pluralism? We do not
think so, because the processes are fragmented, and there are no attempts to integrate
the objects of both the theoretical and the methodological fragments.

Chile
Chile’s case is both interesting and different because the country was subjected to a dic-
tatorial regime during an important stage of the evolution of community social psy-
chology in Latin America. As in other countries, the university had a fundamental role
in community intervention and research. The historical antecedent of the university role
was the support model for communities proposed by the psychiatrist, Juan Marconi
(1982). In Chile, the community support process was blocked; the only ways that pro-
fessionals could come into a community was to provide public assistance or with the
236 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

sponsorship of the church. Hence, community social psychology in Chile used differ-
ent models of community development, popular education, community mental health,
and social rehabilitation.
The objectives of community development in Chile include resource development
and employment of the latent strength of communities for overcoming their problems.
It is then necessary for the professional to identify, together with the community, both
the community’s problems and its resources. Starting with a process of reflection, com-
munity participation is promoted. In cases in which there is a clear orientation towards
intervention, the theoretical and critical dimensions as well as the research process are
of secondary importance. Krause-Jacob (1991) cites Alinsky (1971) and Rothman (1974)
who have proposed guidelines for action. The orientation is described in the report of
a village that was seriously damaged by the military. This community was able to get
organized and motivated for improving their health through the development of social
networks.
Based on Paulo Freire’s (1974) principles, adult education represents another ori-
entation for the CSP in Chile. Social consciousness is developed through the use of dia-
logue for cognitive development (Asun, Aceituno, Alfaro, Morales, & Krause, 1995). In
this process, the professional helps the community by being committed to change. The
community mental health and social rehabilitation project was not typical of Chile and
CSP—it is an example of what should not be done. The purpose of this project was to
provide treatment to young drug addicts; it used a medical model rather than a pre-
ventive–ecological one.
In the first two cases, there was a political commitment by the professionals with the
people from the poor communities. At the same time, there was an orientation toward
the community’s development and ways of participation. There was no relationship be-
tween the praxis and the creation of scientific knowledge. The practical activity was not
oriented by participative action-research methodology, nor were Freire’s principles used
as tools for action. In conclusion, community social psychology in Chile needs to con-
sider this limitation in order to promote the development of its capacity to face its na-
tion’s urgent problems. This has become possible since the political situation has
changed there.

Mexico
The information on Mexico has come from Reid and Aguilar (1991, 1995) and Gomez
del Campo (cited by Wingenfeld & Newbrough, in press). In Mexico, CSP has no dom-
inant theoretical model. Rather, there has been a critical analysis of the traditional the-
ories which have to do with development and an attempt to link community praxis with
selected social psychological issues.
The following theoretical points of view have been identified, each having its re-
spective group of professionals who work at different universities. One of these is Roger’s
humanistic approach: promoting human development by using participation and self-ac-
tualization. Passivity and lack of power are themes also dealt with in the program at the
Ibero-American University. Newbrough’s transactional ecological model (1973, cited by
Reid & Aguilar, 1991), is followed in studies at ITESO University, while Moscovici’s the-
ory of social representations which emphasizes the role of active minorities and their par-
ticipation in solving their own problems is promoted in research conducted at the Uni-
versity at Coalhuila. Applied behavioral analysis is studied at the National Autónomous
 Paradigms • 237

University at Iztacala (Universidad Nociona Autónoma at ENEP Iztacala). Also studied

there is an analysis based on Marxist theory, psychoanalysis, and the concept of con-
sciousness raising that clarifies group processes by using self-reflection. This is inspired
by Pichon Rivière’s operational groups (1977, cited by Reid & Aguilar, 1991) and starts
from the principle that in order to change conditions, it is first necessary to analyze
them. Themes such as poverty, daily life, popular culture, social movements, attributions,
and social identity have been studied and their findings applied to efforts to understand
and shape the processes of community intervention. Concepts of the environment psy-
chology have been used to analyze community environmental problems, personal space,
privacy, perception, and the representation and use of space.
These theoretical foundations have been applied to the study of, and intervention
in, the following problems: (a) the organization and strengthening of popular communities to
promote their self-confidence and their eco- and ethnodevelopment by combining com-
mon and scientific knowledge, individual and collective analyses of experience for both
endogenous and exogenous groups, periodic reports and evaluations of progress of ex-
periences, and the recovery of the community’s history; (b) the promotion of paraprofes-
sionals in community services, beginning with an analysis of urban conflicts by using par-
ticipative action-research, the psychology of active minorities and the processes of
influence, resistance and social change, and Roger’s humanistic perspective, particular-
ly the notions of growth, personal power, and self-esteem. These theoretical bases ori-
ented the development of community centers that offer different kinds of services
(health, education, etc.), where community members actively participate, using the abil-
ities they already have and new abilities that they have learned during the process; (c)
the social impact of the construction of a supply center which required the redistribution of
the local residents. There was a critical analysis of developmental theories, poverty, and
the culture of poverty. The intervention consisted of information campaigns directed to
communities. The substance of the campaigns focused on issues such as the impact of
planned construction and included the use of handouts and audio–visual presentations.
This information, contributed by the residents and obtained from different sources, was
discussed in community groups, thereby offering opportunities for reflection and mobi-
lization for solving the problems. The discussions with the community permitted the
formulation of its history and its cultural identity. This step produced stronger links with-
in communities and a sense of belonging to their area; and (d) the impact of an earthquake.
This work sought to contribute to the alleviation of the stress produced by the living con-
ditions of those left homeless by an earthquake. The intervenor wanted to develop an
alternative physical and psychosocial setting for community life. Several projects were
carried out simultaneously, with different groups for different purposes (e.g., working
with children for the construction of game areas, working on literacy with women, the
acquisition of handicraft abilities, adult education courses, use of urban space, and de-
termination of satisfaction levels with the promised housing project).
The variety of different paradigms were presented as independent, but in some cas-
es they were integrated. An example of this variety and integration is found in the work
of Lourdes Quintanilla, who directed a program to increase the use of paraprofession-
als (Quintanilla et al., 1980, cited by Reid & Aguilar, 1991). This work makes evident the
importance of social representation. One can also include the humanistic point of view
of Roger’s personalism. Praxis needs knowledge that, once identified, is then used with-
out further epistemological consideration. This probably occurs because of the range of
demands made on the project and because of the lack of other knowledge. The inte-
238 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

gration confirms Firestone’s (1990) argument that the professional who is oriented to-
ward practical research encounters different theoretical demands. The combined use of
paradigms has been necessary and possible.
In summary, the work in Mexico has been based on the differentiation of the groups
rather than on the basis of the orientations used. The conceptual variety has also been
expressed in the variation of methods employed that are in response more often to prac-
tical necessities than the theoretical inquiry.

Puerto Rico
In contrast to Mexico, Puerto Rico’s experience shows a conceptual and methodological
homogeneity derived not only from the level of development of this discipline in the aca-
demic context in the university, but also from its own conceptual developments in that con-
text (Serrano-García & López-Sánchez, 1991; López-Sánchez & Serrano-García, 1995).
Berger & Luckman’s (1967) theory of the social construction of reality provides the con-
ceptual basis for their approach. The collection of information about people combined
with information from various sources, contributed to the conceptualization of problem
situations and the shaping of interventions (Serrano-García & López-Sánchez, 1991).
The proposed methodological development, coherent with the conceptual one, fa-
cilitates the free expression of the people who participate in program development. Such
information must come from diverse sources (other than psychology), from common
knowledge and historical analysis. Irizarry and Serrano-García (1979), call the model “in-
tervention in research.” Both processes are inseparable and simultaneous. Other as-
sumptions are: (a) the need to clarify the professional intervenor’s values; (b) the de-
velopment of horizontal relations among the participants; (c) the recognition of the
community’s capacities for solving its problems; and (d) the commitment of the re-
searcher to addressing the needs of the oppressed sectors of society. These assumptions
are based on social constructivism and on the need for social change. Social change is
governed by empowerment notions that imply a continuous increase of people’s power
and control over their environment. The purpose of the work is to reduce oppression
and to improve the quality of life. Community development requires the community’s
active participation and a requisite increase in the members’ self-confidence (Ander Egg,
1980, cited in Serrano-García & López-Sánchez, 1995). Problematization consists of the
questioning of situations that are considered to be natural. This is done so it can be es-
tablished whether or not the social reality has been historically constructed (Freire,
1974). This conceptual framework orients community interventions towards increasing
the level of awareness of the social problems by the community members. To facilitate
intervention through research, the following steps are necessary: familiarization with the
community, identification of needs and resources, meetings with the residents and with
the community leadership, collective work, and the establishment of long- or short-term
goals (Serrano-García & López-Sánchez, 1991).
Some examples of “intervention through research” are: (a) the construction of a
“bridge” that permits the residents easy access to their community and the development
of activities to stop juvenile delinquency; (b) the promotion of a construction of rela-
tionship between homosexuals and heterosexuals, the identification of their needs and
resources, and the clarification of factors that might help their collaboration; (c) the de-
velopment of activities for adolescents, the preparation of community newspapers, and
 Paradigms • 239

negotiations with governmental agencies to improve the services that the community re-
ceives; (d) support of local initiatives for developing community self-help networks for
people with emotional disturbances; (e) the incorporation of new members in a young
people’s assembly in a Protestant church; (f ) the creation of a committee for the recov-
ery of a group of women who were affected by a gas leakage from an industrial complex;
and (g) an increase in the community’s participation in a program to improve the level
of health services provided within the community. All of these initiatives have a central
element; they emphasize educational and planning activities to increase the level of
awareness by the community.
Regarding the integration among paradigms, both the theory and the method in-
crease levels of awareness for promoting social change. The objectives are found in crit-
ical theory. The ontological and epistemological orientations of the constructionist par-
adigm are integrated with the methodologies of critical theory. Perhaps the paradigms
are not incompatible because they can be combined.

Venezuela
Information on the Venezuelan experience is mainly based on the works of Sánchez,
Wiesenfeld, and Cronick (1991), and Wiesenfeld, Sánchez, and Cronick (1995). Ven-
ezuela is similar to Mexico in the variety of its applied theories. These include: (a) prin-
ciples of organizational development, (b) an adaptation of the social technology
approach in which community members define their problems and participate actively
with professionals for their solution, and (c) a psycho-ecological model, that is not based
on the idea of direct control of the environment. In this model, the central idea is that
there is a constant reciprocal interchange among the components of a system. Three
types of changes are proposed in this model—personal, sociocivic, and technological
(Cronick, 1989).
Methodologically, the psycho-ecological model uses a strategy of participatory ac-
tion-research, in which the researcher contacts the community from the beginning of
the project and participates with the community in the gathering of information to ac-
complish objectives. The techniques for collecting information and for interventions
have included traditional procedures such as individual and group interviews, question-
naires, group discussion of printed material, observation, photographic records, records
of anecdotes, group dynamics’ techniques, collective drawing, debates, and “oral” news-
papers.
The social problems that have been addressed by CSP in Venezuela include: (a) the
improvement of health services by involving members of the community into the develop-
ment of these services (linguistic development was tackled as a part of a process of re-
flective action, because the community members agreed with the facilitators that their
language deficits interfered with their capacity for critical analysis and the construction
of their reality); (b) improvement of community services, including paving of the main ac-
cess roads to the community, the construction and set up of four rural schools, the pro-
vision of electric light service to nearby areas, the equipping of a dental clinic, the or-
ganization of a public library, the building of a park, the creation of an inexpensive
grocery store, the creation of a farmer’s market, the repair of the drainage system and
the aqueduct; (c) the creation of housing plans made by the community members and their
construction of these houses, the later construction of a kindergarten and of a children’s
240 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

park, and literacy instruction for the community; (d) improvement of the community’s envi-
ronmental conditions by using alternative, noncontaminating technologies such as the re-
cycling of solid wastes, the creation of a program for the sorting and collection of
garbage and purification of drinking water; and (e) the control of Chagas’ Disease by im-
proving the housing of a rural community that had been constructed using compacted
mud and organic matter.
Analysis of these problems reveals the importance of ideology and of the communi-
ty’s awareness of its needs in order for the members to be mobilized into action. Tech-
nology is important in social change. Language is the basis for the community’s under-
standing, analysis, and interpretation of their problems and needs in light of the equity
of distribution of material and psychological resources within the system (Wiesenfeld,
Sánchez, & Cronick, 1995). There has been a heterogeneous development of the theo-
retical, methodological, and applied aspects of community work in Venezuela.
On the one hand, there has been interest in theoretical development as in the
work of Montero (1984) who has provided a definition of the discipline. Montero
(1994) has considered the role of needs in relation to awareness, conversion, and “de-
ideologization” in community work. Cronick (1989) has proposed a “psycho-ecologi-
cal” model. These developments are the product of methodological strategies in par-
ticipative action-research as they result from praxis and thus, are not independent of
applied work.
On the other hand, community research shows an absence of a unique theoretical
paradigm. Individual authors limit themselves to one to two theories that belong to only
one paradigm. These paradigms contain both positivist and constructionist formulations.
The positivist aspect includes behavioral analysis and social technology. Some of the
methods are coherent with the theory such as selective reward distribution in applied
behavioral analysis. In most cases, however, there is no such consistency. Most research
work contains methods for consciousness-raising. However, this critical perspective is not
compatible with cognitive theories; that is, some cases, have oriented the interventions.
In this sense, one can see that the methodological strategies came from one paradigm,
while the theoretical explanations of research came from another.

SYNTHESIS
I have identified theoretical principles and methodologies that have characterized com-
munity work in six Latin American countries. From the point of view of CSP, communi-
ty intervention is oriented by its emphasis on social change. This happens through con-
sciousness-raising and the subsequent participation of communities in the solution of
their problems. To carry out this process, it is necessary for the community to focus on
material and psychological resources, and in this way, to acquire greater control over its
environment. This ecological perspective assumes that consciousness-raising and action
are inseparable and simultaneous. Consciousness-raising is not related to the construc-
tion that people make of their reality, without their participating in that reality. Nor does
any person’s activity happen without reflection about it. This implies that consciousness-
raising is not a deconstruction that people make of their reality apart from their par-
ticipation in it and that people’s activity is directly related to their reflection about it. I
conclude that critical review and constructionism can be combined when praxis and our
reflection about praxis shows that it is best to do so. In other words, integration is not
assumed to occur a priori, but rather emerges in response to the demands of reality.
 Paradigms • 241

REFERENCES
Alinsky, S. (1971). Rules for radicals. New York: Vantage Press.
Asun, D., Aceituno, R., Alfaro, J., Morales, G., & Krause, M. (1995). La psicología communi-
taria en Chile. Análisis de su características y perspectivas [Community psychology in Chile:
Analysis of its characteristics and perspectives]. In E. Wiesenfeld & E. Sánchez (Eds.), Psicología
social comunitaria. Contribuciones Latinoamericanas [Community social psychology—Latin American
contributions] (pp. 69–115). Caracas, Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Berger, P., & Luckman, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. New York: Doubleday.
Cronick, K. (1989). Un modelo psicoecológico para intervenciones en comunidades [A psycho-
ecological model for community intervention]. Fasciculo de AVEPSO, 6, 55–68.
Dokecki, P. (1992). On knowing the community of caring persons: A methodological basis for the
reflective-generative practice of community psychology. Journal of Community Psychology, 20, 26–35.
Fals Borda, O. (1979). Acción communal en una verda colombiana [Community action as a Columbian
strategy]. Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad Naciona de Colombia, Monografías Sociológicas.
Firestone, W. (1990). Accommodation: Toward a paradigm-praxis dialectic. In E. Guba (Ed.), The
paradigm dialog (pp. 105–124). London: Sage.
Freire, P. (1974). Pegagogía del oprimido [Teaching about oppression]. México: Siglo veintiuno Editores.
Gergen, K. (1978). Toward generative theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36,
1344–1360.
Granada, H. (1991). Interventions of community social psychology: The case of Colombia. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 40, 165–179.
Granada, H. (1995). Intervenciones de la psicología social comunitaria: El caso Colombia [Inter-
ventions in community social psychology: The Columbian case]. In E. Wiesenfeld & E. Sánchez
(Eds.), Psicología social comunitaria. Contribuciones Latinoamericanas (pp. 117–149). Caracas,
Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Guba, E. (1990). The alternative paradigm dialog. In E. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialog.
(pp. 17–30). London: Sage.
Irizarry, A., & Serrano-García, I. (1979). Intervención en la investigación [Intervention re-
search]. Boletín de AVEPSO, 2 (3), 6–21.
Krause-Jacob, M. (1991). The practice of community psychology in Chile. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 40, 143–164.
Kuhn, T. (1975). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas [The structure of scientific revolutions].
México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Lane, S., & Sawaia, B. (1991a). Community social psychology in Brazil. Applied Psychology: An In-
ternational Review, 40, 119–142.
Lane, S., & Sawaia, B. (1991b). Psicología: Ciencia o política? [Psychology: Science and politics?].
In M. Montero (Ed.), Acción y discurso (pp. 387–400). Caracas, Venezuela: Eduven.
Lane, S. T. M., & Sawaia, B. (1995). La psicología social comunitaria en Brasil [Community social psy-
chology in Brazil]. In E. Wiesenfeld & E. Sánchez (Eds.), Psicología social comunitaria. Contribuciones
Latinoamericanas (pp. 69–115). Caracas, Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad Central de Venezuela.
López-Sánchez, G., & Serrano-García, I. (1995). Intervenciones de comunidad en Puerto Rico:
El impacto de la psicología social comunitaria [Community interventions in Puerto Rico! The
impact of community social psychology]. In E. Wiesenfeld & E. Sánchez (Eds.), Psicología social
comunitaria. Contribuciones Latinoamericanas [Community social psychology—Latin American
contributions] (pp. 219–248). Caracas, Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Marconi, J. (1982). La psiquiatría y la salud pública: Un modelo de salud mental [Psychiatry and pub-
lic health: A model of mental health]. Santiago de Chile: Medcom Ltda.
Montero, M. (1984). La psicología comunitaria: Orígenes, principios y fundamentos teóricos
242 • Journal of Community Psychology, May 1998

[Community psychology: Origins, principles, and fundamental theories]. Rivista Latinoameri-

cana de Psicología, 16, 387–400.
Montero, M. (1994). Consciousness raising, conversion, and de-ideologization in community psy-
chosocial work. Journal of Community Psychology, 22, 3–11.
Mummé, F. (1989). Entre el individuo y la sociedas: Marcos y teorías actuales sobre el comportamiento in-
terpersonal [Between the individual and society: Framework and theories about interpersonal be-
havior]. Barcelona: Promociones y Publicaciones Universitarias.
Newbrough, J. R. (1991). Hacia una teoría de la comunidad para la Psycología comunitaria [Towards
a theory of community for community psychology]. Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 25, 1–22.
Newbrough, J. R. (1992). Community psychology for the 1990’s. Journal of Community Psychology,
20, 7–25.
Rappaport, J. (1977). Community psychology: Values, research and action. New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston.
Rappaport, J. (1981). In praise of paradox: A social policy of empowerment over prevention. Amer-
ican Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 1–25.
Reid, A., & Aguilar, M. A. (1991). Construction community social psychology in Mexico. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 40, 181–200.
Reid, A., & Aguilar, M. A. (1995). México: La construcción de una psicología social comunitaria
[Mexico: The construction of a community social psychology]. In E. Wiesenfeld & E. Sánchez
(Eds.), Psicología social comunitaria. Contribuciones Latinoamericanas [Community social psycholo-
gy—Latin American contributions] (pp. 189–218). Caracas, Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad
Central de Venezuela.
Rivera Media, E., & Serrano-García, I. (1985). El desarrollo de psicología de comunidad [The de-
velopment of community psychology]. Paper presented at Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Su-
periores de Occidente (ITESO), Guadalajara, México.
Rothman, J. (1974). Three models of community organization practice. In F. Cox, J. Ehrlich, J.
Rothman, & J. Tropman (Eds.), Strategy of community organizations: A book of readings. Itasca, Illi-
nois: Peacock.
Sánchez, E., Wiesenfeld, E., & Cronick, K. (1991). Community social psychology in Venezuela.
Applied Psychology: An International Review, 40, 219–236.
Sánchez, E., & Wiesenfeld, E. (Eds.). (1991). Community social psychology in Latin America
[Special issue]. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 40(2).
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Serrano-García, I., & López-Sánchez, G. (1991). Community interventions in Puerto Rico: The
impact of social community psychology. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 40, 201–218.
Serrano-García, I., & López-Sánchez, G. (1995). Una perspectiva diferente del poder y el cam-
bio social para la psicología social-comunitaria [A different perspective on power and social
change for community social psychology]. In M. Montero (Ed.), Psicología social comunitaria.
Teoría, método y experiencia [Community social psychology: Theory, method and experience]
(pp. 167–210). Guadalajara, México: Universidad de Guadalajara.
Wiesenfeld, E., & Sánchez, E. (Eds.). (1995). Psicología social comunitaria. Contribuciones Lati-
noamericanas [Community social psychology—Latin American contributions]. Caracas,
Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Wiesenfeld, E., Sánchez, E., & Cronick, K. (1995). La psicología social comunitaria en Venezuela
[Community social psychology in Venezuela]. In E. Wiesenfeld & E. Sánchez (Eds.), Psicología so-
cial comunitaria. Contribuciones Latinoamericanas [Community social psychology—Latin American
contributions] (pp. 249–282). Caracas, Venezuela: Tropykos-Universidad Central de Venezuela.
Wingenfeld, S., & Newbrough, J. R. (in press). Community psychology in an international perspec-
tive. In J. Rappaport & E. Seidman (Eds.), Handbook of community psychology. New York: Plenum.