Revista de Estudios Sociales (Jul 2023)

Perspectivas profesionales sobre la intervención psicosocial en Chile. Una revisión sistemática de estudios cualitativos

  • Miguel Ángel Campillay-Araya,
  • Andrés Di Masso,
  • Gianinna Muñoz-Arce

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7440/res85.2023.07
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 85
pp. 115 – 135

Abstract

Read online

The adoption of the neoliberal model and the implementation of the new public management approach in Chile, have led to the implementation of social policies that prioritize quantifiable efficiency and adherence to administrative standards over effective solutions to social problems. This has had a negative impact on the experiences of professionals working in the field of psychosocial intervention, and on the quality of their interventions. However, the perspectives of these professionals play a crucial role in shaping how they implement their interventions and ultimately determine the perceived effectiveness of social policies. The article pursues two main objectives: firstly, to identify subjective aspects of professionals involved in various psychosocial intervention experiences, and secondly, to explore their connection to the neoliberal nature of Chilean social policies. To this end, a systematic review was conducted, focusing on the perspectives of professionals on Chilean social policies, their work as interveners, and the users they work with. The study followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and a total of 4,799 articles were identified in five databases (Psycinfo, Scopus, Sociological Abstracts, and Web of Science), out of which 26 met the eligibility criteria. The information was analyzed using a thematic synthesis, and the results were organized into five analytical themes: counterproductive framework, internal obstacles, users at fault, threatening tensions, and coping responses. The study concludes that an intervening rationality aligned with negative working conditions and intervention problems underlies these themes. Responses to this rationality are politically ambivalent, as they can either reinforce neoliberal logics or represent transformative lines for radical disruption in psychosocial intervention practices.

Keywords