Daniel B. Fishman

From single case to database: A new method for enhancing psychotherapy, forensic, and other psychological practice

Abstract This article proposes a new model for knowledge generation in applied and professional psychology—the pragmatic case study (PCS) method. Drawing from both psychologys traditional, quantitative and alternative, qualitative approaches, the PCS method involves the creation of systematic, peer-reviewed case studies (in all areas of applied psychology) that follow D. Petersons “disciplined inquiry” epistemological model. The studies would be organized into “journal-databases” that combine (a) individual studies; (b) articles that address epistemological, theoretical, methodological, logistical, economic, political, and ethical issues in the PCS method; and (c) substantive cross-case analyses of groups of individual cases already published in the database. To lay out the proposals arguments, the article begins by setting forth relevant historical and philosophical context, and then examines a possible set of initial methodological guidelines for ensuring rigorous quality in each case study. Next the PCS methods value in creating new and useful applied knowledge is demonstrated for two areas: psychotherapy efficacy research and forensic psychology. Finally, the implications of the present proposal are explored. Throughout, the emphasis is on creating an integrative, pragmatic alternative for gaining new useful knowledge in our discipline.

Postmodernism comes to program evaluation: A critical review of Guba and Lincoln's fourth generation evaluation

Abstract Guba and Lincolns recent book, Fourth Generation Evaluation, is a radical critique of the modernist, positivist foundation of traditional program evaluation, which the authors differentiate into three historical stages or “generations. ”Based upon their analysis, these highly esteemed authors propose a fundamental redefinition and restructuring of the whole evaluation field. In order to deal adequately with the deep and far-reaching implications of their proposals, this review has been extended to a full article length. The main focus of the book is an argument to replace traditional evaluation with “fourth generation evaluation, ” which is based on the post-modernist epistemology of constructivism. In polar contrast to positivisms assumption that the “true” nature of external reality is discoverable through the scientific method, constructivism assumes that there are only alternative, subjective constructions of reality produced by different individuals. Therefore, instead of the positivist role of measuring a programs goal attainment in scientific, quantitative ways, the role of the program evaluator becomes one of facilitating interpretive dialogue among a wide variety of a programs stakeholders. The objective of the dialogue is to attain consensus among the stakeholders upon an emergent construction of the programs value and outcome. The present examination of Guba and Lincolns book begins with general background, proceeds to a detailed summary of their conceptual framework, and ends with a critical assessment of their views.

An introduction to the experimental versus the pragmatic paradigm in evaluation

Abstract This article provides a historical and conceptual framework for the six case studies that follow in this Special Feature section. About 100 years ago, psychology led the social sciences in a “Declaration of Independence” from philosophy. This declaration was supported by the development of Comtes philosophy of positivism, which argued for the superiority of knowledge derived from experimental science over that which came from scholarly interpretation and theory that was not empirically based. The theoretical and technological success of the physical sciences during the first half of the 20th century fueled psychologys commitment to the hypothesis-testing, laboratory-based experimental paradigm. However, for a variety of reasons (e.g., the lack of substantive accomplishments of the experimental paradigm in the social sciences and growing criticism of positivism in the philosophy community), over the past 30 years there has been a breakdown of consensus on the use of the experimental paradigm in psychology, and two alternative models have been developed: a pragmatic paradigm and a hermeneutic paradigm, both based on an epistemology of social constructionism. Although the field of program evaluation has attempted from its beginning to maintain a strong link to the experimental paradigm, in recent years it has been forced by its commitment to real-world program impact to adopt in a more systematic manner aspects of the pragmatic and hermeneutic paradigms. This Special Feature section examines the practical implications of adopting aspects of both the experimental and the pragmatic paradigms in a particular evaluation study. Specifically, the authors of the six case studies were asked to describe and analyze their experiences in terms of whether the two paradigms functioned in their study in a contrasting, conflicting, or complementary manner. The authors were asked to consider a variety of areas of impact, such as research design, data collection methodology, the response of peers, and communication of results.

The Vermont Defendant Accommodation Project: A case study.

This article describes the increasing use of the courts and the jails as “institutions of last resort” for multi-problem clients suffering the effects of mental retardation combined with other life challenges, such as mental illness, substance abuse, homelessness, and a history of physical and/or sexual abuse. The authors label these individuals as suffering from “Horrible Life Disorder” (HLD), and characterize them, for the most part, as lacking the comprehension necessary to navigate through the complexities of the court and probation systems. The article describes and evaluates the development of a program, within the Office of the Defender General of the State of Vermont, to (a) identify and accommodate such mentally retarded, HLD clients in the criminal justice system and (b) train public defense attorneys, judges, police, and probation officers to respond more effectively to the special issues of these citizens.

Publishing systematic, pragmatic case studies in program evaluation: rationale and introduction to the special issue

Abstract The present Special Issue proposes that the creation of a database of systematic, pragmatically focused case studies in program planning and evaluation will be useful to both theorist and practitioner. This knowledge-base can (a) facilitate cross-case comparisons for inductively deriving generalizations of best practice; (b) allow practitioners to use the experience of past cases to guide their practice in present cases; and (c) further explore the foundational nature of evaluation as a discipline. This introduction first explores why there are so few published evaluation case studies. It then describes the development of a pragmatic paradigm, including a common analytic framework for facilitating the conduct, documentation, and discussion of individual case studies and for organizing them into a database. The introduction concludes with a cross-case summary comparison of the three cases in this first part of the Special Issue. In the next issue of this journal, a second part of the Special Issue will be presented. This will include three additional case studies and an analysis of all six of the case studies in terms of what we have learned about the theoretical and practical values—as well as the challenges—of creating a database of systematic, pragmatic case studies in evaluation.

Postmodernism comes to program evaluation II: A review of Denzin and Lincoln's Handbook of qualitative research

Abstract Denzin and Lincolns Handbook of Qualitative Research represents a major publishing event. It comprehensively gathers together and organizes rapidly growing developments in the philosophy, theory and method of conducting qualitative research. While this sounds innocent enough, the power and foundational core behind these developments is explosive: it is the postmodernist attack on the traditional, quantitative methods of positivist social science (including positivist program evaluation). In fact, this book might have well been titled the “Handbook of Postmodern Research.” Postmodernism brings with it highly controversial themes, such as the impossibility of objective knowledge, relativism, the blurring of boundaries between the social sciences and the humanities, and the politicization of social science by such ideologies as feminism, neo-Marxism, and anti-racism. The present review of the Handbook begins with a general orientation to postmodernism and the philosophical paradigms it has nourished. The implications of these paradigms for the organization of the book are then explored. Specifically, Denzin and Lincoln organize the book by the phases of a research study — introduction, research design and method, results, and discussion — with many of the chapters reviewing their topic across paradigms. It is argued that this organization results in two problems: redundancy in the comparison of different paradigms, and violation of the concept of a paradigm as an organizing framework. The review concludes with a discussion of the major significance of the Handbook as a documentation and reflection of the profound changes taking place in the basic assumptional systems that guide all social science.

Evaluation-based planning of professional psychology training program: A model and case example

Abstract To cope with the current diversity and centrifugal trends in our field, the National Conference on Graduate Education in Psychology recently proposed that each department and school of psychology conduct a self-study to clarify its goals, values, and curricular emphases. This article provides a blueprint to enable programs in any area of applied or professional psychology to engage in such a process of intensive self-scrutiny. The model adopted is based chiefly on four features of organizational development: open systems theory, the distinction between process and task emphases, democratic values, and action research. A case example is provided to illustrate how application of the model helps to insure the active collaboration of faculty, students, and alumni, resulting in a ready acceptance and implementation of recommended curricular changes.

Pragmatic Case Studies as a Source of Unity in Applied Psychology

To unify or not to unify applied psychology: That is the question. In this article we review pendulum swings in the historical efforts to answer this question—from a comprehensive, positivist, “top...

Integrative Themes: Prospects for Developing a “psycholegal Lexis”

The articles in this issue are analyzed for integrative themes, with a special focus on their relevance for the development of a “Psycholegal Lexis” (PL). These themes include (a) whether forensic case studies fall within the purview of “science,” as envisioned by Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; (b) issues in implementing the PL proposal, such as the need for more systematic forensic case outcomes and the possible rigidity of a stare decisis use of forensic case studies; (c) the synergistic interconnection between the pragmatic psychology underlying the PL proposal and therapeutic jurisprudence; and (d) ways in which the 8 case studies in this series illustrate the value of creating a new, peer-reviewed, electronic journal database, with the tentative working title, “Pragmatic Case Studies in Forensic Psychology: Method and Database.” The article concludes with a series of conceptual and practical recommendations for justifying and establishing such a journal.

The experimental versus the pragmatic paradigm: Summary and conclusions

Abstract In this article I review and draw conclusions from the use of the experimental and pragmatic paradigms in the six case studies presented in this Special Feature section. First, the studies are summarized in terms of the paradigms. They are then analyzed using the conceptual matrix presented in Table 3 of my introductory article to this section. This matrix looks at a study paradigmatically in terms of two cross-cutting dimensions: (a) type of study result with regard to paradigm mix and (b) areas of impact of the paradigm mix, such as the studys theory, data collection methodology, and the relationship the study has to those who funded it. This analysis illustrates two points: (a) The experimental and pragmatic paradigms have different goals that are frequently in competition for the same study resources, (b) The paradigms can function in a fully complementary manner only when there are (as in the Elias study) an explicit and systematic conceptual model for interrelating the two types of goals and a strategy for attaining resources to accomplish both. It is concluded that in planning an evaluation study, researchers should pay attention not only to a programs substantive goals, but also to its epistemological goals—those of both the researchers themselves and the study s funders and other stakeholders.