Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (2):260-266 (2010)
AbstractWhat kinds of evidence reliably support predictions of effectiveness for health and social care interventions? There is increasing reliance, not only for health care policy and practice but also for more general social and economic policy deliberation, on evidence that comes from studies whose basic logic is that of JS Mill's method of difference. These include randomized controlled trials, case–control studies, cohort studies, and some uses of causal Bayes nets and counterfactual-licensing models like ones commonly developed in econometrics. The topic of this paper is the 'external validity' of causal conclusions from these kinds of studies. We shall argue two claims. Claim, negative: external validity is the wrong idea; claim, positive: 'capacities' are almost always the right idea, if there is a right idea to be had. If we are right about these claims, it makes big problems for policy decisions. Many advice guides for grading policy predictions give top grades to a proposed policy if it has two good Mill's-method-of difference studies that support it. But if capacities are to serve as the conduit for support from a method-of-difference study to an effectiveness prediction, much more evidence, and much different in kind, is required. We will illustrate the complexities involved with the case of multisystemic therapy, an internationally adopted intervention to try to diminish antisocial behaviour in young people
Similar books and articles
Comment : Randomized Controlled Trials and Public Policy.Gerd Gigerenzer - 2009 - In Chrysostomos Mantzavinos (ed.), Philosophy of the Social Sciences: Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Evidence-Based Policy: What’s to Be Done About Relevance?: For the 2008 Oberlin Philosophy Colloquium. [REVIEW]Nancy Cartwright - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 143 (1):127 - 136.
Evidence-Based Medicine as an Instrument for Rational Health Policy.Nikola Biller-Andorno, Reidar K. Lie & Ruud Ter Meulen - 2002 - Health Care Analysis 10 (3):261-275.
What Are Randomised Controlled Trials Good For?Nancy Cartwright - 2010 - Philosophical Studies 147 (1):59 - 70.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Mechanisms and the Evidence Hierarchy.Brendan Clarke, Donald Gillies, Phyllis Illari, Federica Russo & Jon Williamson - 2014 - Topoi 33 (2):339-360.
Fact-Value Entanglement in Positive Economics.Julian Reiss - 2017 - Journal of Economic Methodology 24 (2):134-149.
Why Do Experts Disagree?Julian Reiss - 2020 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 32 (1-3):218-241.
Reason and Value: Making Reasoning Fit for Practice.Michael Loughlin, Robyn Bluhm, Stephen Buetow, Ross E. G. Upshur, Maya J. Goldenberg, Kirstin Borgerson, Vikki Entwistle & Elselijn Kingma - 2012 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 18 (5):929-937.
Rhetoric and Argumentation: How Clinical Practice Guidelines Think.Jonathan Fuller - 2013 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 19 (3):433-441.
References found in this work
Nature's Capacities and Their Measurement.Nancy Cartwright - 1989 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science.Nancy Cartwright - 1999 - Cambridge University Press.
A Metaphysics for Scientific Realism: Knowing the Unobservable.Anjan Chakravartty - 2007 - Cambridge University Press.
Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart.Gerd Gigerenzer, Peter M. Todd & A. B. C. Research Group - 1999 - New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press USA.