Using Habermas’ theory of communicative action to transform sociological analyses of evidence-based policy

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Critical Public Health Pub Date : 2023-04-21 DOI:10.1080/09581596.2023.2204182
C. Bonell, G. Melendez‐Torres
{"title":"Using Habermas’ theory of communicative action to transform sociological analyses of evidence-based policy","authors":"C. Bonell, G. Melendez‐Torres","doi":"10.1080/09581596.2023.2204182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Many sociological analyses of evidence-based policy frame it as contributing to the rationalisation of social relations, and being constructed through and implicated in systems of knowledge/power. These analyses are based on social theory placing insufficient emphasis on the emancipatory potential of evidence, and the possibility of rational adjudication of truth claims. We argue sociological engagement with evidence-based policy could be transformed by being informed by the work of Habermas. Habermas’ work could enable a more nuanced view of EBP in terms of whether or not this leads to rationalisation in the form of de-politicisation or marginalisation of citizens’ voices. Habermas’ work on knowledge-constitutive interests could inform a reconstructed view of evidence, disabused of positivist assumptions and with increased emancipatory potential. Habermas’ notion of the ideal speech situation as a procedural basis for truth could function as a standard for exploring how EBP is affected by power asymmetries, as well as for adjudicating truth claims.","PeriodicalId":51469,"journal":{"name":"Critical Public Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2023.2204182","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Many sociological analyses of evidence-based policy frame it as contributing to the rationalisation of social relations, and being constructed through and implicated in systems of knowledge/power. These analyses are based on social theory placing insufficient emphasis on the emancipatory potential of evidence, and the possibility of rational adjudication of truth claims. We argue sociological engagement with evidence-based policy could be transformed by being informed by the work of Habermas. Habermas’ work could enable a more nuanced view of EBP in terms of whether or not this leads to rationalisation in the form of de-politicisation or marginalisation of citizens’ voices. Habermas’ work on knowledge-constitutive interests could inform a reconstructed view of evidence, disabused of positivist assumptions and with increased emancipatory potential. Habermas’ notion of the ideal speech situation as a procedural basis for truth could function as a standard for exploring how EBP is affected by power asymmetries, as well as for adjudicating truth claims.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
运用哈贝马斯的交往行为理论改造循证政策的社会学分析
许多基于证据的政策的社会学分析将其框架为有助于社会关系的合理化,并且通过知识/权力系统构建并涉及其中。这些分析是基于社会理论,对证据的解放潜力和对真理主张的理性裁决的可能性重视不够。我们认为,社会学对基于证据的政策的参与可以通过哈贝马斯的工作来改变。哈贝马斯的工作可以让我们对EBP有一个更细致入微的看法,即这是否会以公民声音的去政治化或边缘化的形式导致合理化。哈贝马斯关于知识构成利益的工作可以为重建证据的观点提供信息,消除实证主义假设的滥用,并具有更大的解放潜力。哈贝马斯关于理想言语情境作为真理的程序基础的概念,可以作为探索EBP如何受到权力不对称影响的标准,也可以作为裁决真理主张的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Critical Public Health (CPH) is a respected peer-review journal for researchers and practitioners working in public health, health promotion and related fields. It brings together international scholarship to provide critical analyses of theory and practice, reviews of literature and explorations of new ways of working. The journal publishes high quality work that is open and critical in perspective and which reports on current research and debates in the field. CPH encourages an interdisciplinary focus and features innovative analyses. It is committed to exploring and debating issues of equity and social justice; in particular, issues of sexism, racism and other forms of oppression.
期刊最新文献
Factors influencing patients’ engagement with ChatGPT for accessing health-related information Australian burden of disease study: health equity through data disaggregation Indian dance (Bharatanatyam) to ease social loneliness and isolation in older adults Association between menopause and occupational burnout in healthcare workers: a cross-sectional study Enriching the evidence base of co-creation research in public health with methodological principles of critical realism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1