When is it justified to claim that a practice or policy is evidence-based? Reflections on evidence and preferences

Author:

Gade Christian1

Affiliation:

1. Aarhus University, Denmark

Abstract

Background: There has been a widespread call to adopt evidence-based practices and policies in various fields, including healthcare, education, social work, criminal justice, business management, and environmental management. Key points: This article discusses when it is justified for an individual or organisation to claim that a specific practice or policy is evidence-based. My argument is that this is the case if, and only if, three conditions are met. First, the individual or organisation possesses comparative evidence about the effects of the specific practice or policy in comparison to the effects of at least one alternative practice or policy. Second, the specific practice or policy is supported by this evidence according to at least one of the individual’s or organisation’s preferences in the given practice or policy area. Third, the individual or organisation can provide a sound account for this support by explaining the evidence and preferences that lay the foundation for the claim. Conclusions and implications: My argument has at least three noteworthy implications. First, it is possible that some, but not others, are justified in claiming a given practice or policy is evidence-based. Second, being justified in claiming that a practice or policy is evidence-based does not imply that this practice or policy ought to be implemented, not even according to the claimant. Third, the individual’s or organisation’s preferences ought to guide the collection of evidence to help them identify what the best practices and policies are based on their normative stance.

Publisher

Bristol University Press

Subject

Social Sciences (miscellaneous)

Reference22 articles.

1. Post-truth: How Bullshit Conquered the World;Ball, J.,2017

2. Evidence-Based Management: How to Use Evidence to Make Better Organisational Decisions;Barends, E.,2018

3. Using perceptions and evidence to improve conservation and environmental management;Bennett, N.J.,2015

4. How are evidence and policy conceptualised, and how do they connect? A qualitative systematic review of public policy literature;Blum, S.,2022

5. Practice and evidence: the challenge to the American Society of Criminology: 2009 Presidential Address to the American Society of Criminology;Clear, T.R.,2010

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3