Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:23:15.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Incorporating User Perspectives in the Design of an Online Intervention Tool for People with Visible Differences: Face IT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2010

Alyson Bessell*
Affiliation:
University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
Alex Clarke
Affiliation:
Royal Free Hospital, London, UK
Diana Harcourt
Affiliation:
University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
Tim P. Moss
Affiliation:
University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
Nichola Rumsey
Affiliation:
University of the West of England, Bristol, UK
*
Reprint requests to Alyson Bessell, Department of Oral and Dental Science, University of Bristol, Bristol Dental Hospital, Lower Maudlin Street, Bristol BS1 2LY, UK. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Background: Individuals with visible differences can experience social anxiety in relation to their appearance. Social skills-based psychosocial interventions have to date shown only limited effectiveness at addressing their concerns. Aims: To incorporate user perspectives in the development of an online psychosocial intervention, known as Face IT. Method and Results: Study one consisted of a needs assessment with 12 individuals with a visible difference and six health professionals in order to identify the difficulties experienced by those with visible difference and obtain feedback on the proposed content of Face IT. The findings demonstrated support for the social skills model and the use of an online intervention. Study two consisted of an empirical usability evaluation of Face IT with 14 potential users and 14 health professionals. Based on feedback from the participants, changes were made to the graphics and navigation of the programme. The clinical content has been made more acceptable. Conclusions: The findings indicate support for the importance of social skills-based psychosocial interventions for addressing the needs of those with a visible difference, and have allowed modifications to be made to Face IT ahead of a randomized controlled trial of effectiveness.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bessell, A. and Moss, T. (2007). Evaluating the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for individuals with visible differences: a systematic review of the empirical literature. Body Image, 4, 227238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bradshaw, J. (1972). The concept of social needs. New Society, 30, 640643.Google Scholar
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brewin, C. R., MacCarthy, B. and Furnham, A. (1989). Social support in the face of adversity: the role of cognitive appraisal. Journal of Research in Personality, 23, 354372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burrows, R., Loader, B., Pleace, N., Nettleton, S. and Muncer, S. (2000). Virtual community care? Social policy and the emergence of wired self help. Information, Communication and Society, 3, 95121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. and Burnside, I. (1996). Three years of an adult burns support group: an analysis. Burns, 22, 6568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fereday, J. and Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: a hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5, 111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, G. (2000). Understanding experiences of people with disfigurement: an integration of four models of social and psychological functioning. Psychology, Health and Medicine, 5, 117129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleve, L. and Robinson, E. (1999). A survey of psychological needs in adult burn-injured patients. Burns: Journal of the International Society for Burn Injuries, 25, 575579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kleve, L., Rumsey, N., Wyn-Williams, M. and White, P. (2002). The effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural interventions provided at outlook: a disfigurement support unit. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 8, 387395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moss, T. (1997). Individual variation in adjusting to visible differences. In Lansdown, R., Rumsey, N., Bradbury, E., Carr, T. and Partridge, J. (Eds.), Visibly Different: coping with disfigurement. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
Moss, T. (2005). The relationships between objective and subjective ratings of disfigurement severity and psychological adjustment. Body Image, 2, 151159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moss, T. and Carr, T. (2004). Understanding adjustment to disfigurement: the role of self-concept. Psychology and Health, 19, 737748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, R. and Clarke, M. (2000). Evaluation of self-help leaflet in treatment of social difficulties following facial disfigurement. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 37, 381388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2005). Final appraisal determination: computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for depression and anxiety (review). Retrieved 13 August 2006, available from www.nice-org.uk.Google Scholar
Olson, G. M. and Olson, J. S. (2003). Human-computer interaction: psychological aspects of the human use of computing. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 491516.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papadopoulos, L., Bor, R. and Legg, C. (1999). Coping with the disfiguring effects of vitiligo: a preliminary investigation into the effects of cognitive-behavioural therapy. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 72, 385396.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Partridge, J. (1994). Changing Faces: the challenge of facial disfigurement. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Proudfoot, J. G. (2004). Computer-based treatment of anxiety and depression: Is it feasible? Is it effective? Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 28, 353363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ravden, A. S. and Johnson, G. (1989). Evaluating Usability of Human-Computer Interfaces: a practical method. New York: Halsted Press.Google Scholar
Reason, P. and Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of Action Research: participative inquiry and practice. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Robinson, E., Rumsey, N. and Partridge, J. (1996). An evaluation of the impact of social interaction skills training for facially disfigured people. British Journal of Plastic Surgery, 49, 281289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rumsey, N., Clarke, A., White, P., Wyn-Williams, M. and Garlick, W. (2004). Altered body image: appearance-related concerns of people with visible disfigurement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 48, 443453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rumsey, N., Robinson, E. and Partridge, J. (1993). An Evaluation of the Impact of Social Skills Training for Facially Disfigured People. Bristol: Changing Faces.Google Scholar
Smilowitz, E. D., Darnell, M. J. and Benson, A. E. (1994). Are we overlooking some usability testing methods? A comparison of lab, beta and forum tests. Behaviour and Information Technology, 13, 183190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, J. R. (2004). Developing Perform Support for Computer Systems: a strategy for maximizing usability and learnability (pp. 270293). New Jersey: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yates, F. E. (1996). Developing “user-persuasive” programs. In Yates, F. E. (Ed.), Creative Computing in Health and Social Care. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons ltd.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.