社会工作定量研究的终结?后现代/批判理论日益蚕食学术界所带来的威胁

IF 1.7 4区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL WORK Research on Social Work Practice Pub Date : 2024-10-16 DOI:10.1177/10497315241288113
David R. Hodge, Brett Drake
{"title":"社会工作定量研究的终结?后现代/批判理论日益蚕食学术界所带来的威胁","authors":"David R. Hodge, Brett Drake","doi":"10.1177/10497315241288113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Quantitative research plays an instrumental role in facilitating health and wellness. Effective interventions are developed, assessed, and refined through the application of logic and empirical evidence in a scientific milieu characterized by diverse views. However, the increasing colonization of academic discourse by postmodern/critical theory (PCT) may undermine foundational concepts upon which quantitative research rests. The postpositivist tradition in which quantitative methods are embedded emphasizes probabilistic truth, logic, empirical evidence, and the interplay of diverse, frequently conflicting perspectives. Conversely, some currents of thought within PCT emphasize multiple realities, intuition, personal stories of lived experience, and the exclusion of views that challenge PCT tenets. The increasing adoption of these concepts in academia may limit or even delegitimize quantitative research as currently practiced in social work. We conclude by arguing that social work clients are best served by a scientific discourse that values multiple theoretical frameworks, research methodologies, and scientists operating from different social locations.","PeriodicalId":47993,"journal":{"name":"Research on Social Work Practice","volume":"58 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The End of Quantitative Research in Social Work? The Threat Posed by Postmodern/Critical Theory's Increasing Colonization of Academia\",\"authors\":\"David R. Hodge, Brett Drake\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10497315241288113\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Quantitative research plays an instrumental role in facilitating health and wellness. Effective interventions are developed, assessed, and refined through the application of logic and empirical evidence in a scientific milieu characterized by diverse views. However, the increasing colonization of academic discourse by postmodern/critical theory (PCT) may undermine foundational concepts upon which quantitative research rests. The postpositivist tradition in which quantitative methods are embedded emphasizes probabilistic truth, logic, empirical evidence, and the interplay of diverse, frequently conflicting perspectives. Conversely, some currents of thought within PCT emphasize multiple realities, intuition, personal stories of lived experience, and the exclusion of views that challenge PCT tenets. The increasing adoption of these concepts in academia may limit or even delegitimize quantitative research as currently practiced in social work. We conclude by arguing that social work clients are best served by a scientific discourse that values multiple theoretical frameworks, research methodologies, and scientists operating from different social locations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47993,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research on Social Work Practice\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research on Social Work Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315241288113\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research on Social Work Practice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315241288113","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

定量研究在促进健康和保健方面发挥着重要作用。在观点纷呈的科学环境中,通过应用逻辑和经验证据,制定、评估和完善有效的干预措施。然而,后现代/批判理论(PCT)对学术话语的日益殖民化可能会破坏定量研究赖以生存的基本概念。定量方法所依托的后实证主义传统强调概率真理、逻辑、经验证据以及各种观点的相互作用,而这些观点往往是相互冲突的。与此相反,后实证主义中的一些思潮则强调多重现实、直觉、个人生活经验故事,以及排斥挑战后实证主义信条的观点。学术界越来越多地采用这些概念,可能会限制目前社会工作中的定量研究,甚至使其失去合法性。最后,我们认为,重视多种理论框架、研究方法和来自不同社会环境的科学家的科学话语,才能更好地为社会工作客户服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The End of Quantitative Research in Social Work? The Threat Posed by Postmodern/Critical Theory's Increasing Colonization of Academia
Quantitative research plays an instrumental role in facilitating health and wellness. Effective interventions are developed, assessed, and refined through the application of logic and empirical evidence in a scientific milieu characterized by diverse views. However, the increasing colonization of academic discourse by postmodern/critical theory (PCT) may undermine foundational concepts upon which quantitative research rests. The postpositivist tradition in which quantitative methods are embedded emphasizes probabilistic truth, logic, empirical evidence, and the interplay of diverse, frequently conflicting perspectives. Conversely, some currents of thought within PCT emphasize multiple realities, intuition, personal stories of lived experience, and the exclusion of views that challenge PCT tenets. The increasing adoption of these concepts in academia may limit or even delegitimize quantitative research as currently practiced in social work. We conclude by arguing that social work clients are best served by a scientific discourse that values multiple theoretical frameworks, research methodologies, and scientists operating from different social locations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
105
期刊介绍: Research on Social Work Practice, sponsored by the Society for Social Work and Research, is a disciplinary journal devoted to the publication of empirical research concerning the methods and outcomes of social work practice. Social work practice is broadly interpreted to refer to the application of intentionally designed social work intervention programs to problems of societal and/or interpersonal importance, including behavior analysis or psychotherapy involving individuals; case management; practice involving couples, families, and small groups; community practice education; and the development, implementation, and evaluation of social policies.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Social Work Education and the Grand Challenges; Approaches to Curricula and Field Education by R. Paul Maiden and Eugenia L. Weiss Guardrails Needed for Social Science Research Book Review: Addiction Treatment: A Strengths Perspective by Katherine Van Wormer and Diane Rae Davis Response to the Respondents: The NIMH Task Force Report on Social Work Research Sample Size Planning in the Design of Two-Level Randomized Cost-Effectiveness Trials
×
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