Finns det evidens för evidensen? En kvalitativ undersökning av evidensparadigmet
(2022) PSPR14 20212Department of Psychology
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Evidensparadigmet har sedan 80-talet varit rådande inom psykologin som vetenskap och praktik. Kritiker till evidensparadigmet menar emellertid att den positivistiska forskning, framförallt RCT-studier, som bedrivs inom paradigmet vilar på antagandet som inte överensstämmer med den psykoterapeutiska praktiken. Syftet med föreliggande studie var att, genom kvalitativ metod, jämföra hur ett urval av psykodynamiskt orienterade psykologer respektive psykoterapiforskare värderar evidensparadigmet. Semistrukturerade intervjuer genomfördes med sex deltagare, tre psykologer respektive tre psykoterapiforskare. Den transkriberade datan kodades och sex huvudteman samt sju underteman skapades med tematisk analys. De sex huvudteman var; Säkerställandet... (More)
- Evidensparadigmet har sedan 80-talet varit rådande inom psykologin som vetenskap och praktik. Kritiker till evidensparadigmet menar emellertid att den positivistiska forskning, framförallt RCT-studier, som bedrivs inom paradigmet vilar på antagandet som inte överensstämmer med den psykoterapeutiska praktiken. Syftet med föreliggande studie var att, genom kvalitativ metod, jämföra hur ett urval av psykodynamiskt orienterade psykologer respektive psykoterapiforskare värderar evidensparadigmet. Semistrukturerade intervjuer genomfördes med sex deltagare, tre psykologer respektive tre psykoterapiforskare. Den transkriberade datan kodades och sex huvudteman samt sju underteman skapades med tematisk analys. De sex huvudteman var; Säkerställandet av kvalitet, Epistemologisk position, DSM, RCT-studiens kontra psykoterapins villkor, Evidensparadigmet och Minska gapet. Underteman till RCT-studiens kontra psykoterapins villkor var Diagnostikens funktion, Omdöme kontra randomisering, Deltagare och Generell kontra lokal kunskap. Underteman till Evidensparadigmet var Evidensparadigmets för- och nackdelar, Vidmakthållandet av evidensparadigmet samt New Public Management och Evidensparadigmet. Resultatet visar att psykoterapiforskarna tenderar att förhålla sig mer positivt till evidensparadigmet än psykologerna. Resultaten diskuteras utifrån Carl Lesches teorier om psykoterapeutisk praktik och vetenskapsteori, Thomas Kuhns teorier om vetenskapliga paradigm samt Michael Foucaults teorier om diskursiv samt disciplinär makt. Slutligen diskuteras resultaten i relation till implikationer för framtida forskning. (Less)
- Abstract
- The evidence paradigm has dominated the field of psychological practice and research since around 1990. Critics however, have adressed the research-practice gap, suggesting that the positivistic research, such as RCT-studies, conducted within the paradigm are based on assumtioms that are ill fitting with the reality of clinical practice. The aim of the present study is, using a qualitative method, to compare how a selection of psychodynamically oriented psychologists and researchers of psychotherapy evaluate the evidence paradigm. Semistructured interviews were conducted with three psychotherapy researchers and three psychodynamically oriented psychologists. The data was transcribed and coded. Six main themes and seven subthemes were... (More)
- The evidence paradigm has dominated the field of psychological practice and research since around 1990. Critics however, have adressed the research-practice gap, suggesting that the positivistic research, such as RCT-studies, conducted within the paradigm are based on assumtioms that are ill fitting with the reality of clinical practice. The aim of the present study is, using a qualitative method, to compare how a selection of psychodynamically oriented psychologists and researchers of psychotherapy evaluate the evidence paradigm. Semistructured interviews were conducted with three psychotherapy researchers and three psychodynamically oriented psychologists. The data was transcribed and coded. Six main themes and seven subthemes were created using thematic analysis. The main themes were; Ensuring quality, Epistemological position, DSM, The condition of RCT-studies versus psychotherapeutic practice, The evidence paradigm and Reduce the gap. The subthemes for The condition of RCT-studies versus psychotherapeutic practice were The function of diagnostics, Judgement versus randomization, Parcitipants and Gerenal versus local knowledge. The subthemes for The Evidence paradigm were Pros and cons of the evidence paradigm, Maintenance of the Evidence paradigm and New Public Management and the Evidence paradigm. The results indicate that the researchers of psychotherapy tended to regard the evidence paradigm in a more positive manner, compared to the psychologists. The results are discussed in relation to Carl Lesches and Donald Schöns theories on psychoterapeutic practice, Thomas Kuhns theories on scientific paradigms and Michael Foucaults theories on discursive and disciplinary power. Lastly the results are discussed in relation to their implications for future research. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9075250
- author
- Wullt, Jonatan LU
- supervisor
-
- Per Johnsson LU
- organization
- alternative title
- Is there evidence for the evidence? A qualitative investigation of the evidence paradigm
- course
- PSPR14 20212
- year
- 2022
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Evidence Paradigm, Research-Practice Gap, Clinical Psychology, Power, RCT-studies, Evidensparadigmet, Forskning-praktik gap, klinisk psykologi, makt, RCT-studier
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9075250
- date added to LUP
- 2022-02-14 16:36:23
- date last changed
- 2022-02-14 16:36:23
@misc{9075250,
abstract = {{The evidence paradigm has dominated the field of psychological practice and research since around 1990. Critics however, have adressed the research-practice gap, suggesting that the positivistic research, such as RCT-studies, conducted within the paradigm are based on assumtioms that are ill fitting with the reality of clinical practice. The aim of the present study is, using a qualitative method, to compare how a selection of psychodynamically oriented psychologists and researchers of psychotherapy evaluate the evidence paradigm. Semistructured interviews were conducted with three psychotherapy researchers and three psychodynamically oriented psychologists. The data was transcribed and coded. Six main themes and seven subthemes were created using thematic analysis. The main themes were; Ensuring quality, Epistemological position, DSM, The condition of RCT-studies versus psychotherapeutic practice, The evidence paradigm and Reduce the gap. The subthemes for The condition of RCT-studies versus psychotherapeutic practice were The function of diagnostics, Judgement versus randomization, Parcitipants and Gerenal versus local knowledge. The subthemes for The Evidence paradigm were Pros and cons of the evidence paradigm, Maintenance of the Evidence paradigm and New Public Management and the Evidence paradigm. The results indicate that the researchers of psychotherapy tended to regard the evidence paradigm in a more positive manner, compared to the psychologists. The results are discussed in relation to Carl Lesches and Donald Schöns theories on psychoterapeutic practice, Thomas Kuhns theories on scientific paradigms and Michael Foucaults theories on discursive and disciplinary power. Lastly the results are discussed in relation to their implications for future research.}},
author = {{Wullt, Jonatan}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Finns det evidens för evidensen? En kvalitativ undersökning av evidensparadigmet}},
year = {{2022}},
}