THE ISSUE Is What Are the Criteria for Development of Occupational Therapy Theory? A Response to Fidler's Life Style Performance Model T he Life Sryle Performance Model is intended ro provide "a framework for knowing and undemanding a person's roral activiry repertoire within the context of his or her human and nonhuman world" (Fidler, 19%, p. 139). Ir grew out of Fidler's Life Sryle Performance Profile, which was first developed in the 1970s, and was presenred as a model in rhe February 1996 issue of the American Journal oJOccupational Therapy (50[2]:139-147). Although its inten- rions are laudable, including a holisric perspective to ensure rhe relevance of occupational therapy interventions ro the person receiving them, we believe that rhe construction of this model is flawed. We rhink rhat rhe Life Sryle Performance Model does nor achieve its primary goal of avoiding rhe "ambigui- ries and srereorypes inherent in rhe gen- eralized rerms of work, play, leisure, and self-care" (p. 139). Fidler's (19%) claim rhar rhe model is "applicable ro all ages, cu!rures, and persons" (p. 140) is evidence of an ethnocenrric perspec- rive in rhar definirions of key rerminol- ogy are lacking and rhe relarionship of the conceprs presenred ro rhe cired occuparional therapy and cross-discipli- nary rheories is eirher not evident or inaccurare. We also found rhat rhe overall presentarion of the model is dis- organized, resulting in a lack of clariry of central conceprs. Work, Play, Leisure, and Self- Care According ro Fidler (1996), a key pur- Clare Hocking, Gail Whiteford Clare Hocking, Dip OT, AdlJDip OT, is Senior Lecturer, School oJ Occupational Therapy, Auckland Institute oj Technology, PO Box 92-006, Auckland, New Zealand. Gail WhitefOrd, BHSc(OT), MHSc{OTJ, is Head, SchooloJOccupational Therapy, Auckland Institute oJTechnology, Auckland, New Zealand. This arricle was accepred for publicarion November G, 1996. pose of the Life Sryle Performance Profile is ro discern and articulate rhe relevance of "personal and interpersonal dimensions of daily living acriviries" (p. 139). In an attempr ro avoid rhe ambi- guities and srereorypes rhat she per- ceived ro be inherent in rhe general rerms work, play, leisure, and self-care, Fidler insread identified four activiry domains. These domains are Self-Care and Self-Maintenance, Intrinsic Grati- ficarion, Social Contriburion, and Interpersonal Relaredness. The problem for potential users of the Life Sryle Performance Model is rhar Fidler did nor identifY what rhe ambiglliries and stereorypes are. Therefore, it is im possi- ble ro evalliare wherher her proposed classificarion avoids rhe same criricism. Some of rhe difficulries apparenr in rhe work, leisure, and self-care caregories remain. Which domain a specific acrivi- ry firs into depends on the person's definirion as shaped by his or her age, life experience, and socioculrural envi- ronmenL One person may prepare food ro survive (Self-Care and Self-Mainre- nance), whereas another cooks for plea- sure (Intrinsic Grarificarion). Thus, no greater clariry in categorization of acrivi- ries is achieved. Neirher does Fidler's c1assificarion achieve grearer consisrency rhan a work-Ieisure-self-care raxonomy in which how an activiry is defined changes with the siruation or contexL For example, rhe same acriviry may be classified as Self-Care and Self-Mainte- nance if carried our at home but as Social Contriburion if undertalcen for paymenr. Furrhermore, an acriviry may simulraneously fall into more rhan one category. If a lecturer enjoys interacring wirh srudents, that occuparion may be both Intrinsic Grarificarion and Social Contribution. Thar is, rhe proposed car- egories are nor mutually exclusive (see Chrisriansen's [1994] critique of tax- onomies in occuparional therapy for a full discussion). A further point is thar Fidler (19%) claimed rhat her acriviry-focused domains of daily living relare ro the "fundamental biopsychosocial needs of the human being" (p. 139). How rhey telare is not explicated. Theoretical Critique Fidler's (1996) declared intention was rhar her model is hoI is ric and universal, rhar is, "applicable ro all ages, cultures, and persons" (p. 140). Wirhour exren- sive research, rhese are difficulr claims ro prove or, indeed, disprove. However, February 1997, Volume 51, Number 2 154 Downloaded from http://ajot.aota.org on 07/08/2020 Terms of use: http://AOTA.org/terms