Hair As a Barrier to Physical Activity among African American Women: A Qualitative Exploration

There is consensus that health promotion programs should be culturally sensitive (CS). Yet, despite the ubiquitous nature of CS within public health research and practice, there has been surprisingly little attention given to defining CS or delineating a framework for developing culturally sensitive programs and practitioners. This paper describes a model for understanding CS from a public health perspective; describes a process for applying this model in the development of health promotion and disease prevention interventions; and highlights research priorities. Cultural sensitivity is defined by two dimensions: surface and deep structures. Surface structure involves matching intervention materials and messages to observable, "superficial" characteristics of a target population. This may involve using people, places, language, music, food, locations, and clothing familiar to, and preferred by, the target audience. Surface structure refers to how well interventions fit within a specific culture. Deep structure involves incorporating the cultural, social, historical, environmental and psychological forces that influence the target health behavior in the proposed target population. Whereas surface structure generally increases the "receptivity" or "acceptance" of messages, deep structure conveys salience. Techniques, borrowed from social marketing and health communication theory, for developing culturally sensitive interventions are described. Research is needed to determine the effectiveness of culturally sensitive programs.

It is a truism of health education that programs and interventions will be more effective when they are culturally appropriate for the populations they serve. In practice, however, the strategies used to achieve cultural appropriateness vary widely. This article briefly describes five strategies commonly used to target programs to culturally defined groups. It then explains how a sixth approach, cultural tailoring, might extend these strategies and enhance our ability to develop effective programs for cultural groups. The authors illustrate this new approach with an example of cultural tailoring forcancer prevention in a population of lower income urban African American women.

The health effects of light-intensity physical activity (PA) are not well known today.