Diffusion of Innovation Theory: A Bridge for the Research‐Practice Gap in Counseling

Abstract

This article presents a diffusion of innovation theory‐based framework for addressing the gap between research and practice in the counseling profession. The author describes the nature of the research‐practice gap and presents an overview of diffusion of innovation theory. On the basis of the application of several major postulates of diffusion of innovation theory to the research‐practice gap, several theory‐based research practices and questions are proposed.

Feasibility and Effectiveness of a Delirium Prevention Bundle in Critically Ill Patients

“…The research team delayed data collection for approximately 4 weeks to enable the staff to become proficient in the use of the CAM-ICU and to ensure adoption by at least 4 of 5 categories of adopters. 20 Nurses in the control group provided standard ICU care. The study groups had similar patient acuity, ICU length of stay, and comorbid conditions ( Table 2).…”

Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) Theory: Challenges and Opportunities for Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice

“…Lebow (1988) noted that research on intervention outcomes helps us select specific services to better meet individual needs. The need to integrate research and practice is increasingly apparent as limited financial resources lead to demands for more evidencebased practice (Antony, 2005;Murray, 2009) as well as requirements for increased accountability (Goodyear & Benton, 1986;Sampson, 2008).…”

“…A chasm also appears to exist between many researchers and practitioners, with researchers perceiving that their work is dismissed or ignored and practitioners perceiving that research fails to address their clients' needs (Murray, 2009). A key issue here is the relevance of research to practice, as numerous authors have criticized the applicability of research to practice or practitioners (Anderson & Heppner, 1986;Heppner & Anderson, 1985;Howard, 1985;1986;Gelso, 1979;Goodyear & Benton, 1986;Lebow, 1988;Murray, 2009;Reardon, Lenz, Sampson, & Peterson, 2011).…”

“…A key issue here is the relevance of research to practice, as numerous authors have criticized the applicability of research to practice or practitioners (Anderson & Heppner, 1986;Heppner & Anderson, 1985;Howard, 1985;1986;Gelso, 1979;Goodyear & Benton, 1986;Lebow, 1988;Murray, 2009;Reardon, Lenz, Sampson, & Peterson, 2011). Several factors may contribute to the reduced relevance to practice, including differences between (a) the settings for research and the settings for counseling (Antony, 2005), (b) the specific questions posed in research and the questions posed in counseling (Gelso, 1985), (c) the constructs used in research and the constructs used in counseling (Gelso, 1985), and (d) the participants used in research and the clients typically encountered in practice (Martin & Martin, 1989).…”

Experiential Learning: Teaching Research Methods with PhotoVoice

“…Despite the emphasis on the scientist-practitioner model, the limited research competency among counselors is a persistent issue in the counseling profession (Borders, Wester, Fickling, & Adamson, 2014;Generali et al, 2011;Murray, 2009;Okech, Astramovich, Johnson, Hoskins, & Rubel, 2006;Wester, Borders, Boul, & Horton, 2013). For example, Okech et al (2006) found that counselor educators in CACREP-accredited doctoral counselor education programs possessed varying levels of research training competence, which likely reflects the inconsistent and varied research training doctoral students receive.…”