...
首页> 外文期刊>European Journal of Psychotherapy & Counselling >Embracing the ‘allegiance effect’ as a positive quality in research into the psychological therapies-exploring the concept of ‘influence’
【24h】

Embracing the ‘allegiance effect’ as a positive quality in research into the psychological therapies-exploring the concept of ‘influence’

机译:在心理疗法的研究中,将“ alalgiance effect”作为一种积极的品质,探索“ influence”的概念

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

This paper challenges the elite position given to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in assessing the viability of psychological therapies in the National Health Service. The debate into the significance of the ‘allegiance effect’ in dictating the outcomes of comparative studies into psychological therapies, particularly research that supports behavioural and cognitive behavioural therapies, reconfirms existing methodological arguments that challenge the claims made by traditional scientific methods of research. The underlying epistemological assumptions of RCTs are identified and critiqued with reference to the work of Husserl, Heidegger and Polanyi. An alternative to a scientific approach to research is explored based on Heidegger's theory of Daisen and Polanyi's work on tacit knowledge. The term ‘influence’ is presented as an alternative to the pursuit of causality and the discovery of definitive truth, seen as the underlying motives for a scientific approach to research. From this perspective, the determination of a researcher to persuade others of the value of their particular allegiance to a point of view or orientation could be seen as a potential quality of a study rather than a reason to dismiss the findings. Freud's classic case studies are used to illustrate the epistemological concept of ‘influence’, which represents an understanding of the pursuit of knowledge that is grounded on human experience. The paper concludes by arguing that RCTs should be considered as one of a range of approaches to research that might influence decisions on public funding, seen as part of a more pragmatic approach to research and evidence.View full textDownload full textKeywordsinfluence, evidence, phenomenology, epistemology, researchRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13642531003637767
机译:这篇论文挑战了随机对照试验(RCT)在评估国家卫生局心理疗法的可行性方面的精英地位。关于“效用效应”在决定比较研究对心理疗法(尤其是支持行为和认知行为疗法的研究)的结果的重要性方面的辩论,再次证实了现有的方法论论点,这些论点挑战了传统科学研究方法提出的主张。参考胡塞尔,海德格尔和波兰尼的著作,确定并批判了RCT的基本认识论假设。基于海德格尔的大森理论和波兰尼的隐性知识工作,探索了一种科学方法的替代方法。 “影响力”一词是追求因果关系和确定真实性的替代方法,被视为科学方法的基本动机。从这个角度来看,确定研究者说服他人效忠某个观点或方向的价值,可以被视为一项潜在的研究质量,而不是驳斥该发现的理由。弗洛伊德的经典案例研究用于说明“影响力”的认识论概念,它表示对基于人类经验的知识追求的理解。本文的结论是,RCT应该被视为可能影响公共资金决策的一系列研究方法之一,被视为更务实的研究和证据方法的一部分。查看全文下载全文关键字影响力,证据,现象学,认识论,研究相关的变量add add_id ;添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13642531003637767

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号