The Fluidity of Health: Interdisciplinary Perspectives from Anthropology and Psychology

The Fluidity of Health: Interdisciplinary Perspectives from Anthropology and Psychology

Health is a complex and multi-dimensional construct. Its definition, while seemingly straightforward, becomes nebulous when observed from varying disciplinary lenses. This article delves into the intricacies of health, viewed from both the psychological and anthropological standpoints, and elucidates the interplay between these disciplines in understanding health behaviors, especially patient default.

Psychology in Healthcare vs. Psychology of Health

Psychology in healthcare predominantly deals with the application of psychological theories and principles in clinical settings. It addresses the psychological factors influencing health outcomes and behaviors, like adherence to treatment. On the other hand, the psychology of health examines the mental and emotional factors associated with well-being and illness.

One area of interest is understanding why patients default or deviate from prescribed treatments. Such behaviors can be a product of individual psychology, cultural beliefs, socio-economic constraints, or a blend of these factors.

Interplay of Anthropology and Psychology in Health

Anthropology offers insights into how different societies perceive health and illness, emphasizing the collective nature of these perceptions. It focuses on the 'how' and 'why'—how people in different cultures perceive health and why they hold certain beliefs or practices.

When combined with psychology's focus on individual and group behavior, a holistic picture emerges, elucidating the complexities of health behaviors. For instance, while psychology might delve into the cognitive biases leading to patient default, anthropology might uncover societal norms or traditions leading to similar outcomes.

Interdisciplinary Approaches in Health Studies

K.R. Nayar's paper titled "Social Sciences in Health: Towards a Paradigm" calls for a cohesive approach, integrating various social sciences to comprehensively address health challenges. Such an interdisciplinary approach aids in linking different levels and dimensions, from individual psychological processes to broader societal structures.

Concepts like eco-social epidemiology, political economy, and the holistic and realist approaches allow for a multifaceted understanding of health systems. These concepts don't just provide isolated perspectives; they create a symphony of interconnected ideas, painting a comprehensive picture of health and well-being.

The Essence of Disciplines and the Interrelation of Concepts

A discipline is characterized by its unique theory, subject matter, concepts, and methodologies. However, in the realm of health, these boundaries blur. Data systematized into coherent information leads to explanatory interpretations, where theory defines the relationship between cause and effect.

This blending of disciplines births concepts like "health culture"—the collective belief systems and behaviors associated with health in various societies. From the staunch biomedical approach to an individual's self-care practices, culture plays a pivotal role in shaping health behaviors.

Well-being, too, is multifaceted. While "quality of life" attempts to quantify well-being, its qualitative aspects, like finding meaning and satisfaction in interactions, are equally vital.

Conclusion

In essence, understanding health and health behaviors requires a fluid, interdisciplinary approach. By bridging the gaps between disciplines like psychology and anthropology and harnessing their collective insights, a richer, more comprehensive understanding of health emerges—one that is cognizant of the myriad factors influencing individual and community health behaviors.

K.R. Nayar (1993): Social Sciences in Health: Towards a Paradigm. IASSI Quarterly Vol. 2,No.1 & 2, pp.153-59.