For easy reference, the theoretical map originally presented by Freeman & Pennekamp (1988) has been revised as shown in Figure 2. It illustrates some of the theories that are relevant to an understanding of the natural environment. This map is similar to Germain and Gitterman's (1980) use of the ecomap to conceptualize relationships in space and Kurt Lewin's process of mapping systems in order to conduct force field analyses (Jenkins, 1962). The theoretical map in Figure 2 consists of a series of concentric circles which illustrate the conceptual accessibility (closeness or distance) of these theories to workers in space as they engage in practice. Many workers are typically located closest to the individual client at a conceptual level. Thus, theories of organizations, community development and planning, and cultural groups may seem less relevant and accessible to them in their daily practice, while developmental and personality theories are assumed to be of more practical use.
To discourage this kind of narrow perspective about theories, the map can be used to emphasize the following: whichever theories workers draw upon in a particular circumstance, they should also "straddle" other relevant circles or consider theories in both directions from that point. This can insure that their use of theories is more dynamic and integrative. To illustrate, a social worker working with Ah Hong's family on his delinquent behavior and his school adjustment would need to draw upon family system theories.
For any given issue which is being addressed, theories more relevant to that issue may be in the foreground, while other theories more in the background should be considered as well in the on-going assessment. Some of these theories are more encompassing than others. General systems theory, which describes phenomena ranging from a single living cell within an organism to a total society, actually transcends all conceptual levels in contrast to the single levels at which each of these other theories operate. Theories of culture also help to explain complex human behavior at several levels ranging from the individual to a specific cultural group (see Figure 2).
