text: V. White’s (2006) ‘the state of feminist social work’
example: Feminist woman-centred practice with an older man and woman
and reflect is Alice and Karina’s work a ‘feminist conspiracy’?
lis t of figures
1.1 Types of theory 6
1.2 Approaches to practice. (a) Perspective. (b) Framework. (c) Model. (d) Explanatory theory 9
1.3 Why use theor y? 12
1.4 The role of social work theory 16
1.5 The social constr uction of social work 18
1.6 Three views of social work and their underlying political philosophies 21
1.7 The five shared value principles of social work theory 25
1.8 Arenas of the social construction of social work 27
2.1 Groups of practice theories and their contribution to practice 33
2.2 Wide-ranging theory reviews 36
2.3 Selective theor y reviews 38
2.4 EBP: six steps 54
2.5 Positivist (EBP) and realist research compared 61
3.1a Top-down (deductive) and bottom-up (inductive) theory development 71
3.1b Theor y development as a process of enquiry and debate 72
3.1c Theor y development as a process of accumulation 73
3.1d Practice constraints as a degradation or limitation of theoretical development 73
3.2 Sheppard et al.’s process knowledge 77
3.3 The reflection process 80
3.4 Redmond’s model rotations 86
4.1 Historic and current types of psychodynamic theory 103
4.2 Psychodynamic social work ideas about the str ucture of the mind 104
4.3 Maroda’s psychodynamic techniques 114
4.4 Brandell’s four elements of psychodynamic social work 115
4.5 The strange situation procedure 121
5.1 The concept of crisis 137
5.2 Crisis inter vention strategies and interventions 140
5.3 Crisis inter vention assessment principles and skills 141
5.4 Kanel’s ABC skills model of crisis inter vention 142
5.5 Rober ts’s seven-stage crisis intervention model 142
5.6 Sequence of actions in task-centred practice 144
5.7 Exploring problems 145
5.8 Task planning and implementation sequence 147
6.1 Sources of current CBT 155
6.2 Cognitive-behavioural models of practice 157
6.3 Principles of motivational inter viewing 166
6.4 Farmer’s important areas of neuroscience knowledge 170
6.5 CBT assessment 171
6.6 CBT case formulation 173
6.7 The CBT treatment sequence 174
6.8 Issues in Freda’s family 176
6.9 Assessing the Four Ps 178
6.10 CBT inter vention programme 181
7.1 Some systems in the Marsalis family 188
7.2 Some more systems connecting with the Marsalis family 189
7.3 Systems concepts 191
7.4 The main social work systems 196
7.5 Basic ecological concepts and social work practice implications 201
7.6 Ecological concepts in the life model 204
7.7 The life model of social work practice 205
7.8 Main areas of life model practice intervention 207
8.1 The capabilities of the social entrepreneur 223
8.2 Burghardt’s macro assessment 233
8.3 Burghardt’s grassroots leadership development 235
9.1 Personal and social constr ucts compared 251
9.2 Myers’s dif ferences between solutionfocused and traditional social work 259
9.3 Solution-oriented practice framework 261
9.4 Research and experience supporting goal definition 263
9.5 Useful goal-setting questions 264
9.6 White’s mapping of narrative practice 266
9.7 Levels of tasks in solution-oriented practice 267
10.1 Ideas contributing to humanistic social work 276
10.2 Developing the democratic mutual aid system 288
10.3 Helping groups establish and work on group goals 289
10.4 Religion, spirituality and social work 290
11.1 Lee’s empowerment vision 310
11.2 Lee’s principles and practice of empowerment 310
11.3 Hoefer’s unified model of advocacy practice 312
11.4 Social justice scorecard for policy alternatives: minority families 315
11.5 Advocacy mapping to set the advocacy practice agenda 315
12.1 Sources of critical practice theory 327
12.2 Neo-liberal principles 328
12.3 Str uctural analysis of society 336
12.4 Myths of oppression 338
12.5 Str uctural social work practice 341
12.6 Fook’s critical practice 345
13.1 Feminist practice strategies 363
14.1 The development of theories and practices from racial conflicts 376
14.2 Anti-racist perspectives 383
14.3 Three concentric formulations of anti-oppressive practice 388
14.4 Four main elements of anti-oppressive practice 394
14.5 Reframing practice as anti-oppressive 395
14.6 Web of intersecting identities 398
This page intentionally left blank
Preface to the fourth edition
The aims of this book and its social construction perspective
It continues to be my aim in Modern Social Work Theory to present and review theories that currently inform the practice of social work. I want to show how these ideas can guide and enthuse us, enhancing social work practice so that it achieves the outcomes that policy and law, our professional imagination and our clients’ needs and aims set for us.
I have completely rewritten this fourth edition in an attempt to make the text an easier read. In response to feedback, I have included and highlighted more case examples, increased the use of diagrams to help readers who find a visual presentation of ideas helpful, and reduced the complexity of tables summarizing the texts that have been reviewed. I am grateful to Emma Reith-Hall for providing two extended case studies in Chapters 2 and 6, which contribute to our understanding of the complex interaction between theory and practice in our agencies. I have also spread throughout the text opportunities for you to ‘pause and reflect’, applying your own thinking to crucial aspects of the argument.
One illustration of the pace of theory development in social work is that, although this edition is being published only eight years after the previous edition, most of my accounts of example texts, which show how social work writers have used theories to present comprehensive accounts of practice, are new. I have continued to include the bare bones of how each group of theories developed, with historical citations that I hope will continue to provide a bibliographical resource, but mostly I refer to current sources. About a third of the citations were published since the last edition, and about two-thirds since the millennium.
Part of the reason for this comprehensive change is an equally substantial change in my perspective. I have retained my social construction perspective because it makes clear that many different interests form our theory and practice. In particular, our clients, their families, carers and communities make demands on us and work in alliance with us. In doing so, they stretch us and our theory and practice to help and work with them better. But, as accountable professionals, our theory and practice are also influenced by political and social ideas and our professional learning, skill and experience.
More than a quarter of a century ago, however, when I was first writing Modern Social Work Theory in the late 1980s, we were coming to the end of what some (for example, Orme and Shemmings, 2010) have called the theory or paradigm ‘wars’. Theories were
opposed to one another; people argued that some were better than others and would supplant them, but it has not turned out to be so. Instead, reviewing theory as it is currently used, I increasingly find that there are shared ideas present in most practice theories. In Figure 1.7, I extract these principles, which I call the ‘the shared value principles’ of social work practice. They are present in the way in which most theory is used today in practice, and you will find them recurring as you read social work theory and practice texts. I have sometimes highlighted them in discussing particular theories, but if you bear them in mind you will find them leaping out at you elsewhere in the text.
This book is, therefore, an argument that, rather than being at war, social work theories are increasingly presented as contributors to the range of enterprises that social work engages with. Therefore, I have changed the structure of each chapter to say first: ‘this is the special contribution to your practice that this group of theories makes’.
My decision to suggest these shared values as signs of agreement about practice theory might be criticized as taking a consensus view of the social phenomenon that is social work. But no, I think there is still plenty of principled disagreement in social work even if common modes of practice are emerging. I look forward to watching future developments.
The structure of the book and its chapters
The book is divided into two parts. Part 1 (Chapters 1–3) summarizes general debates about social work theory and how to apply it. Part 2 (Chapters 4–14) reviews the main groups of social work theories, derived from my analysis of leading texts in Chapter 2. The structure of each chapter in Part 2 starts by defining:
the theory’s distinctive features that make up its main contribution to social work practice; and then offers a summary account of:
the main points that help us to understand that contribution; important practice ideas and concepts that this group of theories has contributed to social work; these cover only ideas used in practice, and this section is not a glossary of theoretical terms; major statements of this theory in current social work texts; a debate summary of the main points of contention about this theory.
The debate summary leads into a more detailed account of this group of theories, considering:
wider theoretical perspectives that put the theory in context – where did it come from?; connections between this theory and other social work theories; the politics of the theory, showing how it is contested in social work debate; values issues: a brief comment on values issues raised by the theory.
Building on this account of the theory, I then provide an account of how it is put into action within social work, covering:
applications: an overview of how the theory is applied in social work; example text(s) selected from book-length accounts of how a particular author has applied this group of theories in a social work text; the judgements that informed the selections are accounted for in the ‘major statement’ section earlier in the chapter; conclusion: using the theory sums up the main points about how this group of theories is used in social work practice.
Each chapter ends with:
additional resources, which include further reading and specialized journals, and suggestions of websites that provide good access to internet resources.
From the lists above, the following are either a new section or in a new format in this edition:
main contribution; debate summary; values issues:; applications; example text; conclusion: using the theory; additional resources.
I have continued to try to restrain the size of this volume, although it is again longer than its predecessor, and my accounts of a particular theory are only a starting point for a further exploration – hence the additional resources that I suggest. This means that, to anyone committed to a particular theory or point of view, my at times heavy condensation is disputable and disputed. My aim is to give access to a range of ideas and encourage readers to progress from this introduction to the comprehensive accounts you can find in the books and articles I have referred to. I find the social work literature full of stimulating ideas for practice and understanding. I am sure you will do so, too.
I hope that new generations of practitioners and students will continue to find this review of social work practice theories useful in constructing their practice.
MalcolM Payne Sutton, Surrey
The publishers would like to express their gratitude to Lyceum Books for their permission to use Figures 10.1 and 14.6 and to Policy Press for Figure 1.6.
a bout the author
Malcolm Payne is Emeritus Professor, Manchester Metropolitan University, and Honorary Professor in the Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education at Kingston University/St George’s University of London, with further honorary academic appointments in Finland and Slovakia. From 2003 to 2012, he was Director of Psychosocial and Spiritual Care and Policy and Development Adviser, St Christopher’s Hospice, London. He is the widely translated best-selling author and editor of many books and articles, including, recently, What is Professional Social Work?, The Origins of Social Work: Continuity and Change, Social Care Practice in Context, Humanistic Social Work: Core Principles in Practice, Citizenship Social Work with Older People and (with Margaret Reith) Social Work in End-of-life and Palliative Care. He is an active contributor to social media, including Twitter (@malcolmpayne) and blogs on older people and end-of-life care.
a note on terminology
‘clients’ and other words for the people we work with
There are problems with putting people into categories. Many social workers dislike giving the people they work with category names like ‘client’, ‘patient’, ‘resident’ and ‘user’. It sometimes leads to them being referred to as ‘the clients’ or ‘the users’ in a disrespectful way, and all these terms are unacceptable to some of the people to whom they are applied.
Different countries have varying preferences. Since this book has an international circulation, I have often used the term ‘client’ as being the most inclusive and generally understandable term for its wide range of readers. I use other terms where the circumstances are appropriate, for example ‘patients’ when referring to healthcare situations, ‘residents’ when referring to residential care, and ‘users’ when referring to people who are receiving packages of services or to services for people with learning disabilities, where this term has the widest currency.
Social development issues
In literature about international issues, people argue over how to refer to the economic and social development of particular countries. Should we say that a country is developed, underdeveloped or developing, which hides an assumption that development is a desirable end result? The term ‘Third World’, referring to political allegiance, derives from the Cold War period and has appropriately fallen out of use. Should we say that a country is a Western country, meaning a country with an industrialized developed economy, whose culture originates from European and North American models? Some writers refer to the North (the northern hemisphere) and the South, implying that most countries in the North are economically developed and most in the South are not. Some countries in the Southern hemisphere, such as Australia, are ‘Northern’ and ‘Western’ in their social and economic development and culture.
Some countries, however, do not fit into any such category. Examples might be countries such as China that are experiencing rapid economic and social change and development alongside substantial poverty and inequality, or Eastern European ‘transition’
economies, which are moving from being part of the Soviet sphere of influence to participation in European economic markets.
Bearing all this in mind, I have chosen in this book to refer to economically developed countries with a largely European or North American culture as Western countries. I refer to poorer nations with less industrially developed economies as ‘resource-poor’, a term that is current in the healthcare professions.
This page intentionally left blank
The social construction of social work theory 1
Main contribution
This chapter aims to help practitioners feel confident in using theory in their practice. It discusses the different kinds of social work theory and the arguments around them, and explains how all of this may be useful in practice. It shows how social work theory in general, and practice theory in particular, is socially constructed in interactions between clients and practitioners in their agencies and in wider political, social and cultural arenas. This makes clear that we build both practice and theory through our experience operating in the real world; they are not given to us from on high. Social construction ideas also show that practice and theory are not separate, settled bodies of knowledge, but constantly evolve and influence each other. Change in social work, and in the lives of practitioners and clients, is possible through engagement in this process of evolution of ideas and practice.
Main points
The main aim of the book is to review social work practice theories.
Theories are generalized sets of ideas that describe and explain our knowledge of the world in an organized way.
Theory is different from both knowledge and practice.
All practice is influenced by formal and informal theories of what social work is, how to do social work and the client world.
The four types of practice theory are perspectives, frameworks, models and explanatory theories; they often complement each other.
Theory helps us understand and contest ideas, and the world around us, offers a framework for practice and helps us to be accountable, self-disciplined professionals. Social construction ideas emphasize that change for social institutions and individuals is always possible, although it may be slow, and social experience often reinforces stability rather than change.
The social construction of social work forms a politics; this means that groups within the profession contend to gain influence over practice by getting support for particular theories.
Three views of social work objectives (empowerment, social change and problemsolving) are derived from the aims of social work and from political philosophies. They form the context in which practice theories are socially constructed.
Five shared value principles affect our use of all practice theories: alliance, aim, action sequence, critical practice and rights.
Social work is socially constructed in three main arenas of debate and practice theories in the arena of relationships between clients, workers and social agencies.
Clients make an important contribution to the construction of social work through their reflexive interaction with practitioners in social work agencies.
Theory and knowledge in social work practice
All over the world, at this moment, people are struggling into an office to see a social worker, or they are meeting a social worker in their home or working with a social worker in a building such as a residential care home or groupwork or day centre. How can the people using the social worker’s services understand what is happening? How can the social worker decide what to do and explain it to them? You may have found that many statements about social work are generalized or idealistic and give no clue about what is supposed to happen when social work takes place. Yet social workers have to learn what to do and carry out what their profession expects of them. To do this, they rely on practice theories, that is, theories that provide an organized account prescribing what social workers should do when they practise.
The main aim of this chapter is to help you understand what theory is and what social work practice theories are, and to think through some of the debates about using them in practice. In this first section, I look at ideas about the various kinds of theory and knowledge available in social work and how theory and knowledge are connected but different.
What is theory?
One way to answer this question is to start from general ideas about theory. Sheldon and Macdonald (2009: 34) examine a dictionary definition of it and suggest that our understanding includes both scientific and everyday uses of the word. To a scientist, a theory is a general principle or body of knowledge, reached through accepted scientific processes, that explains a phenomenon. The everyday use of the word ‘theory’ refers to abstract thoughts or speculations. In its everyday use, therefore, people may think that theory is generally disconnected from reality. Many social work writers (for example, Howe, 2009; Sheldon and Macdonald, 2009; Thompson, 2010) focus on explanation and structure: a theory should explain some aspect of the world in an organized form. Others accept less
exacting understandings of theory: Nash et al. (2005a) see theory as a ‘map’ interacting with practice. Fook (2012: 44) argues that there are many different meanings of theory, and that the important thing is to be inclusive so that we do not cut ourselves off from useful ideas.
Bringing these points together, I define a theory as a generalized set of ideas that describes and explains our knowledge of the world around us in an organized way. A social work theory is one that helps us to do or to understand social work.
There is a debate about whether practice theories, that is, those which tell us what to do in social work, or how to do it, are more important than theories about what social work is or where it fits into related services. Later in this chapter, I discuss practice theory in greater detail. Nash et al. (2005a) suggest that a fundamental requirement of social work theory is that it interacts with or is useful in some way in practice. D’Cruz (2009) similarly argues that social work is not interested in knowledge or theory that has no practical use. On the other hand, Sheldon and Macdonald (2009: 35) argue that British and American everyday thinking sees theory as too abstract. This is not a view shared with writers across the globe, for example in Europe, where philosophical argument is valued on its own merits.
These arguments demonstrate the following:
Theory is different from knowledge – theory involves thinking about something; knowledge is a description of reality. Reality is a picture of the world that is accepted as true.
Theory is different from practice – theory is thinking about something; practice involves doing something.
While we can distinguish theory from knowledge and from practice, it is also connected to them. First, if a theory is to explain the world, it must explain our knowledge of the world. The real is more than what is merely apparent; understanding a reality involves ensuring that the apparent is true, using some agreed process to check that what appears to be true actually is true. The real world exists independently of theories and ideas about it, but evidence about that real world has to be obtained in ways that are accepted as valid through the ‘accepted scientific processes’ that I mentioned above. Second, social work is an activity, something that we do, so theories about it must be explanations of the real world that connect with how we act as practising social workers.
Types of social work theory
There are different types of theory in social work. In Figure 1.1, I have collected a number of points that enlarge on Sibeon’s (1990) distinction between formal and informal theory. Formal theory is written down and debated in the profession and in academic work. Informal theory consists of wider ideas that exist in society or that practitioners derive from experience. Sibeon (1990, p. 34) also distinguishes between three different types of theory:
Theories of what social work is are part of a discourse about the meaning of social work. Discourses are disagreements between people, which you can see or hear in debates in articles and at conferences, but they are also reflected in the different ways people do social work. You can, therefore, take part in a discourse because of the way you do something, and not only in talk and writing. I consider theories about the meaning of social work briefly later in this chapter and more fully in Payne (2006). They offer different views of social work that, when you put them together, give you a fuller picture of what it is and what its aims are.
Theories of how to do social work are the practice theories that this book explores. They build on theories of what social work is by saying: ‘If social work is like this and these are its aims, here are some ideas about how to do that and achieve the aims.’
Theories of the client world are about the social realities that social workers deal with.
Much of this material is contested in the field it came from. For example, ideas in child development, or the sociology of families and organizations, are vigorously debated. It is useful to know about them as we deal within social work agencies with children in their families. However, using this material in social work means that we must transfer it from its original discipline into social work practice. In doing this, we have to remember that it is not final knowledge; there will still be continuing disagreement over it and research into it. In addition, agencies, child development and family sociology interact in a particular way in social work because social workers need this information for their particular purposes, which are different from those of, say, doctors. The practice theories that I discuss in this book connect knowledge from different disciplines to social work practice; they say: ‘To practise in the way this theory proposes, you need these kinds of knowledge from other fields of study.’ In this way, practice theories help us practise by organizing how we transfer knowledge into social work.
1.1 Types of theory
Types of theory‘Formal’ theory
Theories of what social work is
Theories of how to do social work
Theories of the client world
Formal written accounts defining the nature and purposes of welfare (e.g. personal pathology, liberal reform, Marxist, feminist)
Formal written theories of practice (e.g. casework, family therapy, groupwork); applied deductively; general ideas may be applied to particular situations
Formal written social science theories; empirical data (e.g. on personality, marriage, the family, race, class, gender)
Source: Sibeon (1991), Fook (2012) and Gilgun (1994).
‘Informal’ theory
Moral, political and cultural values drawn upon by practitioners for defining the ‘functions’ of social work
Theories inductively derived from particular situations; can be tested to see if they apply to particular situations; also unwritten practice theories constructed from experience
Practitioners’ use of experience and general cultural meanings (e.g. the family as an institution, ‘normal’ behaviour, good parenting)
Figure
You may, as you look at Figure 1.1, need an explanation of informal theories as being ‘inductively derived’. Induction means generalizing from particular examples, that is, ‘bottom-up’ theorizing in which you start from a series of similar experiences and make up a theory that explains them. Deduction, on the other hand, means arriving at conclusions about the particular instance from a general theory, that is, ‘top-down’ theorizing in which you look at a theory that someone has formulated and work out how a case you are working on fits in. A case example may help to understand this distinction.
case example: using induction and deduction when working with dying people
this example considers people’s emotional reactions to dying. Perhaps you have worked with several dying people who at first got angry, and then became depressed, and then accepting about their approaching death. By a process of induction, you might create an informal model of the progression of emotional reactions to impending death using your experience. imagine that you then meet a dying person who is depressed. As a deduction from your model, you might work on the assumption that they will shortly become accepting. So induction allows you to take ideas from a particular case or a small number of cases and use them to create a general theory. in this way, induction enables practitioners to transfer ideas observed from practice experiences into more general theories. it also allows us to contribute to theory from our own practice. We can feed patterns that we observe into writing about social work or into discussion about practice in our agency. deduction, on the other hand, allows you to use general theories in practice. For
example, in this same area of work, KüblerRoss (1969) came up with a theory in an interview study of dying people that they went through five stages. First, they went through a stage of disbelieving their diagnosis; she called this the shock and denial stage. Second, they went through an anger stage – resentment that this was happening to them. next, they went into bargaining behaviour, for example: ‘if i eat more healthily, i’ll be able to fight this illness and recover.’ the fourth stage was depression, and finally they became accepting of their fate. if you knew about Kübler-Ross’s work, you would not need to use induction to create your own theory. instead, from day one in your job, if you came across a dying person who was angry, you would expect bargaining behaviour next. So knowing about her theory allows you to hit the ground running in your work, rather than having to work without any guidelines until you have built up experience from lots of different situations.
The problem with both deduction and induction is that they can lead you astray. Suppose, for example, you did not see enough examples. You might assume that something was a pattern, when, if you looked at more examples, you would find that there were many exceptions to your initial assumption. The answer to this problem is to treat all your inductive theories cautiously, constantly testing them out with new experience. In this way, you build up better evidence to support your work. Deduction may also be unreliable, because you might also be led astray by the research that led to the theories you are making deductions from. Indeed, Kübler-Ross’s theory has been refined to suggest that these reactions are quite common, but people do not go through all the stages in order, so, if a client misses one out, practitioners do not have to worry that they are not adjusting properly to their situation. Therefore, practitioners
need to look at the evidence that underlies a theory and, on finding aspects of it that are not true, may need to adjust their deductions and contribute that experience to the literature to refine the theory. All professions build up knowledge to support their work in this kind of way. In addition, they need to keep an eye on new research that tells them when a theory has been modified. So whether working inductively or deductively, practitioners have to keep on learning.
Induction and deduction therefore go together and interact with each other: practitioners deduce how to practise from general theories and induce ideas from experience to contribute to the theory.
Types of practice theory
Practice theory covers four different approaches to thinking about how to practise, which I illustrate in Figure 1.2.
Opinion differs about whether all of these approaches are equally useful. Perspectives allow practitioners to make decisions according to general guiding principles. Lying behind a preference for using perspectives is a philosophy that human beings are immensely diverse and that precise rules about how to act do not allow you to respect that diversity. Instead, you deduce from your perspective how to act in the particular situation that you are facing. A preference for using perspectives also has the advantage of integrity: your perspective and your actions fit your personal value systems. Frameworks are more concrete and less value-based than perspectives, although there are usually some implied values that can be teased out from how they work. They can help us by setting out the range of situations that we typically have to deal with, and by identifying the range of methods available for us to select from, perhaps giving us some basis for making our selection. Models are frameworks that set out a clear sequence of actions to take when we are faced with a particular situation. Explanatory theories are models that are based on well-researched explanations of human and social behaviour, so the sequence of actions that you take is informed by knowledge about the reasons why this situation occurs and is backed up by evidence about the right actions to take to achieve the required outcome.
People prefer frameworks, models and particularly explanatory theories because they think it is wrong for their own personal values and preferences to intrude into decisions about professional actions. They think it is more ethical instead to concentrate on evidence that tells you what will be most effective in dealing with people and the problems they are facing; in that way, you may have a better chance of achieving what your agency or client wants. However, this sort of approach sees social work as a more technical matter of applying knowledge in a neutral way. People who use perspectives say that since social work is a human, interpersonal process, using a coherent set of ideas that is right for the human beings involved is more likely to be effective than using a non-human technical process.
1.2a Perspectives express ways of thinking about the world based on consistent values and principles. Perspectives help you to apply a coherent set of ideas to what is happening. Applying different perspectives can help you see situations from different points of view. Examples of perspectives are humanistic (Chapter 9) or feminist (Chapter 13) theories.
Situation Perspective: how to look at a situation
1.2b Frameworks organize bodies of knowledge in a systematic way so that you can focus on and select useful knowledge required to practise in different situations. Systems theories (Chapter 7) are a good example.
Situations dealt with in social work
1.2c Models extract patterns of activity from practice and describe what happens during practice in a structured form. This helps to give our practice consistency in a wide range of situations. Models help you to structure and organize how you approach a complicated situation. A good example is task-centred practice (Chapter 5).
1.2d explanatory theory accounts for why an action results in or causes particular consequences and identifies the circumstances in which it does so. Some writers reserve the word ‘theory’ for ideas that offer this causal explanation. To them, theories have to tell you ‘what works’ and why it works. Cognitive-behavioural theory (Chapter 6) is an example.
Figure 1.2 Approaches to practice. (a) Perspective. (b) Framework. (c) Model. (d) Explanatory theory
