{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018276762402088774, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.88622754491018, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Formal Theory Versus Stakeholder Theory

Health promotion and social betterment program interventions are based on either formal theory from academia or stakeholder theory from stakeholders' observations and experiences in working with clients. Over time, formal theory-based interventions have acquired high prestige, while stakeholder theory-based interventions have been held in low esteem. Here we examine the assumption that formal theory-based interventions are superior to stakeholder-based interventions in addressing community problems. The article elaborates on these ideas via a case study of a community-based, environmental tobacco smoke prevention program evaluation. The authors conclude that although both types of interventions had their strengths and limitations in the real world, the stakeholder theory-based intervention was more viable and effective than the formal theory-based intervention in this case due to implementation reasons. Findings are useful in understanding these two intervention types, in developing better strategies to address community problems, and in advancing program theory and theory-driven evaluation.