From Scientism to Science: How Contemporary Epistemology Can Inform Practice Research

Clinical Social Work Journal

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 157-165

  Anastas, Jeane W ^a  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Critical theory; Epistemology; Practice research; Pragmatism; Realism; Social work research

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862117891     PISSN: 00911674     EISSN: 15733343     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10615-012-0388-z     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Abrams, L. S., & Moio, J. A. (2009). Critical race theory and the cultural competence dilemma in social work education. Journal of Social Work Education, 45(2), 245-261.
2. Anastas, J. W. (2000). Research design for social work and the human services (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
3. Anastas, J. W., & Congress, E. (1999). Philosophical issues in doctoral education: A survey of doctoral program directors. Journal of Social Work Education, 35(1), 143-154.
4. Barad, K. M. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
5. Berger, P. L., & Luckman, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books.
6. Bergin, M., Wells, J. S. G., & Owen, S. (2008). Critical realism: A philosophical framework for the study of gender and mental health. Nursing Philosophy, 9, 169-179.
7. Bhaskar, R. (1978). A realist theory of science. Brighton: Harvester.
8. Bhaskar, R. (1989). Reclaiming reality. London: Verso.
9. Bhaskar, R. (2008). A realist theory of science. New York: Routledge.
10. Boland, K., & Atherton, C. (2002). Heuristics versus logical positivism: Solving the wrong problem. Families in Society, 83, 7-13.
11. Cook, C. (2009). Women's health theorizing: A call for epistemic action. Critical Public Health, 19(2), 143-154.
12. Cornish, F., & Gillespie, A. (2009). A pragmatist approach to the problem of knowledge in health psychology. Journal of Health Psychology, 14(6), 800-809.
13. Davis, L. V. (1986). A feminist approach to social work research. Affilia, 1(1), 32-47.
14. Eckhardt, E., & Anastas, J. W. (2007). Research methods with disabled populations. In F. K. O. Yuen, C. B. Cohen, & K. Tower (Eds.), Disability and social work education: Practice and policy issues. Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.
15. Epstein, I. (2010). Clinical data mining: Integrating practice and research. New York: Oxford University Press.
16. Fausto-Sterling, A. (2000). Sexing the body: Gender politics and the construction of sexuality. New York: Basic Books.
17. Foucault, M. (1965). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason. New York: Random House.
18. Foucault, M. (1988). The history of sexuality (Vol. 1). New York: Vintage Books.
19. Fraser, M., Taylor, M. J., Jackson, R., & O'Jack, J. (1991). Social work and science: Many ways of knowing? Social Work Research & Abstracts, 27(4), 5-15.
20. Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Gilgun, J. F. (1994). Hand into glove: The grounded theory approach and social work practice research. In E. Sherman & W. J. Reid (Eds.), Qualitative research in social work (pp. 163-174). New York: Columbia University Press.
22. Gleick, J. (2011). Information: A history, a theory, a flood. New York: Pantheon Books.
23. Goldenberg, M. J. (2006). On evidence and evidence-based medicine: Lessons from the philosophy of science. Social Science and Medicine, 62, 2621-2632.
24. Goldenberg, M. J. (2009). Iconoclast or creed? Objectivism, pragmatism, and the hierarchy of evidence. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 52(2), 168-187.
25. Gorman, J. (1993). Postmodernism and the conduct of inquiry in social work. Affilia, 8(3), 247-264.
26. Haack, S., & Lane, R. (Eds.). (2005). Pragmatism, old and new: Selected writings. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
27. Hacking, I. (1999). The social construction of what?. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Hansen, J. T. (2007). Counseling without truth: Toward a neo-pragmantic foundation for counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85, 423-430.
29. Harding, S. G. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
30. Harding, S. (2006). Social science and social inequality: Feminist and postcolonial issues. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
31. Harding, S., & Norberg, K. (2005). New feminist approaches to social science methodologies: An introduction. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 30(2), 2009-2015.
32. Harré, R. (1985). Philosophies of science. New York: Oxford University Press.
33. Harré, R. (1986). Varieties of realism. Oxford: Blackwell.
34. Hart, E., & Bond, M. (1995). Action research for health and social care. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
35. Hartman, A. (1990). Many ways of knowing. Social Work, 35(1), 3.
36. Healy, K. (2001). Participatory action research and social work: A critical appraisal. International Social Work, 44(1), 93-105.
37. Heineman (Pieper), M. (1981). The obsolete scientific imperative in social work research. Social Service Review, 55, 371-396.
38. Heineman-Pieper, J., Tyson, K., & Heineman Pieper, M. (2002). Doing good science without sacrificing good values: Why the heuristic paradigm is the best choice for social work. Families in Society, 83(1), 15-28.
39. Houston, S. (2001). Beyond social constructionism: Critical realism and social work. British Journal of Social Work, 31, 845-861.
40. Iverson, R. R., Gergen, K. J., & Fairbanks, R. P. (2005). Assessment and social construction: Conflict or co-creation? British Journal of Social Work, 35, 689-708.
41. James, W. (1948). Pragmatism. New York: Longmans, Green & Co.
42. Jordan-Young, R. M. (2010). Brain storm: The flaws in the science of sex differences. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43. Kazi, M. A. F. (2000). Contemporary perspectives in the evaluation of practice. British Journal of Social Work, 33, 755-768.
44. Kazi, M. A. F. (2003). Realist evaluation for practice. British Journal of Social Work, 33, 803-818.
45. Kuhn, T. M. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
46. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction if scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
47. Lushin, V., & Anastas, J. W. (2011). Endpage: Harm Reduction in Substance Abuse treatment: Pragmatism as an epistemology for social work practice. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 11, 96-100.
48. MacIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Los Angeles: Sage.
49. Manicas, P. T., & Secord, P. F. (1983). Implications for psychology of the new philosophy of science. American Psychologist, 38, 399-413.
50. Mäntysaari, M. (2005). Realism as a foundation for social work knowledge. Qualitative Social Work, 4, 87-98.
51. Mizak, C. (Ed.). (2009). New pragmatists. London: Oxford University Press.
52. Mohall, G. V., Hazel, K. L., Allen, J., Stacheirot, M., Hensel, C., & Faith, R. (2004). Unheard Alaska: Culturally anchored participatory action research on sobriety with Alaska natives. American Journal of Community Psychology, 33(3/4), 263-273.
53. Murray, C. J. L., et al. (2006). Eight Americas: Investigating mortality disparities across races, counties, and race-counties in the United States. PLos Medicine, 3(9), e260. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pmed. 0030260.
54. Oquist, P. (1978). Epistemology of action research. Acta Sociologica, 21(2), 143-163.
55. Ortiz, L., & Jani, J. (2010). Critical race theory: A transformational model for teaching diversity. Journal of Social Work Education, 46(2), 175-193.
56. Padgett, D. (1998). Does the glove really fit? Social Work, 43, 373-381.
57. Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications.
58. Peile, C., & McCouat, M. (1997). The rise of relativism: The future of theory and knowledge development in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 27, 343-360.
59. Pieper, M. H. (1989). The heuristic paradigm: A unifying and comprehensive approach to social work research. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 60, 8-34.
60. Polansky, N. A. (Ed.). (1960). Social work research. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.
61. Rorty, R. (1982). Consequences of pragmatism. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
62. Saulnier, C. F. (1999). Feminist theories and social work: Approaches and applications. New York: Haworth Press.
63. Sayer, A. (2000). Realism and social science. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
64. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London & New York: Zed Books.
65. Swigonski, M. E. (1993). The logic of feminist standpoint theory for social work research. Social Work, 39(4), 387-393.
66. Thyer, B. (1993). Social work theory and practice research: The approach of logical positivism. Social Work and Social Sciences Review, 4(1), 5-26.
67. Tyson, K. (Ed.). (1995). New foundations for scientific social and behavioral research: The heuristic paradigm. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
68. Videka-Sherman, L., & Reid, W. (1990). Advances in clinical social work research. Silver Spring, MD: NASW Press.
69. Whyte, W. F. (1991). Participatory action research. Newburk Park, CA: Sage.
70. Witkin, S. L. (1991). Empirical clinical; practice: A critical analysis. Social Work, 36(2), 158-163.
71. Zimbalist, S. E. (1977). Historic themes and landmarks in social welfare research. New York, NY: Harper & Row.