Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice

Thyer, Bruce A.; Pignotti, Monica

doi:10.1891/9780826177698

Cited by 56 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Labels like “bad science” (Goldacre, 2009 ), “voodoo science” (Park, 2002 ), and most commonly “pseudoscience” (Lilienfeld et al, 2003 ) are typically used to refer to ideas or practices that seek to resemble real science, but which fail to follow its guiding principles. Many writers have sought to demarcate “real” science from pseudoscience in a wide range of fields, including clinical psychology (Tavris, 2014 ), social work (Thyer and Pignotti, 2016 ), and health care (Singh and Ernst, 2008 ). Yet, despite concerns regarding the proliferation of pseudoscientific ideas and practices, not much is known about their prevalence among professionals who draw upon ideas related to learning in their work (Dekker et al, 2012 ), among which sports coaches could be included (Jones, 2006 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Prevalence of Pseudoscientific Ideas and Neuromyths Among Sports Coaches

Bailey¹,

Madigan

Cope

et al. 2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There has been an exponential growth in research examining the neurological basis of human cognition and learning. Little is known, however, about the extent to which sports coaches are aware of these advances. Consequently, the aim of the present study was to examine the prevalence of pseudoscientific ideas among British and Irish sports coaches. In total, 545 coaches from the United Kingdom and Ireland completed a measure that included questions about how evidence-based theories of the brain might enhance coaching and learning, how they were exposed to these different theories, and their awareness of neuromyths. Results revealed that the coaches believed that an enhanced understanding of the brain helped with their planning and delivery of sports sessions. Goal-setting was the most frequently used strategy. Interestingly, 41.6% of the coaches agreed with statements that promoted neuromyths. The most prevalent neuromyth was “individuals learn better when they receive information in their preferred learning style (e.g., auditory, visual, or kinesthetic),” which 62% of coaches believed. It is apparent that a relatively large percentage of coaches base aspects of their coaching practice on neuromyths and other pseudoscientific ideas. Strategies for addressing this situation are briefly discussed and include changing the content of coach education programs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Prevalence of Pseudoscientific Ideas and Neuromyths Among Sports Coaches

Bailey¹,

Madigan

Cope

et al. 2018

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Restrictive holding therapies coercively applied to noncompliant children are another example of so-called therapies which evidence suggests should not be used. See Thyer and Pignotti (2015) and Holden and Barker (2018) for numerous examples of treatments which research suggests should not be used. More positive research evidence can be used to suggest potentially useful therapies which should be used, when this information is incorporated with clients' preferences and values, professional ethics, one's own clinical expertise, available resources, costs, and the other elements which go into the decision-making process known as evidence-based practice.…”

Section: Potential Problemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal Editorial Policy: Guidelines for Authors

Schelbe

Thyer

2018

Child Adolesc Soc Work J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the process to publish in the Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal (CASWJ)? How should I structure my manuscript for the CASWJ? What advice do you have for someone preparing a manuscript for the CASWJ? These are some of the questions that you may have as you determine if you wish to prepare a manuscript for publication in the CASWJ. This editorial provides guidance, demystifies the process, and answers questions about publishing in CASWJ. Let us begin with a brief overview of the CASWJ. Over 3 decades old, the CASWJ features original articles that focus on social work practice with children, adolescents, and their families. The journal addresses current issues in the field of social work drawn from theory, direct practice, research, and social policy. The range of topics includes problems affecting a variety of specific populations in special settings. CASWJ welcomes a range of scholarly contributions focused on children and youth, including theoretical papers, narrative case studies, historical analyses, traditional reviews of the literature, descriptive studies, single-system research designs, correlational investigations, methodological works, pre-experimental, quasi-experimental and experimental evaluations, meta-analyses and systematic reviews. Appropriate fields of practice include interpersonal practice, small groups, families, organizations, communities, policy practice, nationally-oriented work, and international studies. Manuscripts involving qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods are welcome to be submitted, as are papers grounded in one or more theoretical orientations, or those that are not based on any formal theory. To get a sense of CASWJ publications, you may wish to review recent issues. Inquiries regarding the potential suitability of your paper may be directed to either Co-Editor. The journal does not have any page limits, but requires that all submissions be formatted in strict compliance with all aspect of the current APA style. Manuscripts should be submitted online at http:// www.edito rialm anage r.com/casw.

show abstract

“…Following the work of Thyer and Pignotti (2015), this study does not pose as an apologist for ''pseudoscience'' in social work practice nor would it deny past and current inadequacies in the use of sound science to inform social work practice. The use of sound science to inform social work practice is a critical component in the profession of social work.…”

Section: Study Purposementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Determining the extent to which there is cognitive intelligence in the informal-interactive tool processing system is important because its dominance does not guarantee its cognitive intelligence. In the United States and Britain, for example, research on social work practice has long been wary of embracing cognitive processes simply because they are dominant, popular, or the result of experience (Gambrill, 2012a(Gambrill, , 2012bPignotti & Thyer, 2009;Sheldon & Chilvers, 2000;Thyer & Pignotti, 2015). The extent to which there is cognitive intelligence in the informal-interactive tool processing system is particularly salient when attempting to interpret the clinician who described her seasoned experience as a type of rapid assessment instrument.…”

Section: I've Sort Of Learned Through Experience What Work and What mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice Evaluation Strategies Among Clinical Social Workers

Davis

Dennis

Culbertson

2015

Research on Social Work Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Practice evaluation strategies range in style from the formal-analytic tools of single-subject designs, rapid assessment instruments, algorithmic steps in evidence-based practice, and computer software applications, to the informal-interactive tools of clinical supervision, consultation with colleagues, use of client feedback, and clinical experience. The purpose of this study was to provide practice researchers in social work with a more complete understanding of how and why social workers evaluate their practice the way they do. Methods: Questions about practice evaluation strategies were posed to 12 licensed clinical social workers in a 3-hour focus group. Findings: Drawing on advances in the cognitive and social neurosciences, the study identified among clinical social workers an informal-interactive tool preference that displays itself as a cognitively necessary, sufficient, and stand-alone preference that required neither the supplementation nor balance of formal-analytic tools. Conclusions: New directions in social work practice research are required and delineated.

show abstract

Science and Pseudoscience in Social Work Practice

Cited by 56 publications

References 0 publications

The Prevalence of Pseudoscientific Ideas and Neuromyths Among Sports Coaches

The Prevalence of Pseudoscientific Ideas and Neuromyths Among Sports Coaches

Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal Editorial Policy: Guidelines for Authors

Practice Evaluation Strategies Among Clinical Social Workers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About