Taking empirical evidence seriously v.2.01

Author:

Tilden Terje1ORCID,Solem May‐Britt2,Thuen Frode3,Lorås Lennart3ORCID,Stokkebekk Jan4,Whittaker Kristoffer1

Affiliation:

1. Research Institute at Modum Bad Vikersund Norway

2. Oslo Metropolitan University Oslo Norway

3. Western Norway University of Applied Sciences Bergen Norway

4. The Office for Children, Youth and Family Affairs (Bufetat) Oslo Norway

Abstract

AbstractThis article discusses the status and challenges related to the basic perspective of knowledge and science in systemic practice. This article points out that some parts of the field (i.e. collaborative dialogical practice) have a preference for knowledge obtained through qualitative rather than quantitative studies. This is problematised, partly based on methodology and partly on the bias this entails in the provision of knowledge to students and systemic practitioners. The consequences of such a preference may be that systemic practitioners will lack significant knowledge, and that they are not encouraged to conduct or participate in quantitative studies. This issue highlights a stronger focus on the field's basic perspectives, as well as key political, ethical and professional policies. In response, the article presents the theories of interactive constructivism and critical realism and proposes that these become the guiding paradigm for systemic practice.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Clinical Psychology,Social Psychology

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