Stephen, Susan and Elliott, Robert (2011) Developing the adjudicated case study method. Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy, 7 (1). pp. 230-241.
PDF (Developing the Adjudicated Case Study Method)
Stephen_and_Elliott_2011_PCSP_Commentary.pdf - Preprint
In this commentary we discuss Miller’s Panel of Psychological Inquiry (PPI) and Bohart’s Research Jury method approaches to the development of the adjudicated case study method, as represented by the papers assembled for this issue of Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy. In our view, the case studies presented here demonstrate the rapidly developing potential offered by this approach for psychotherapy research and reveal many parallels to recent research using the Hermeneutic Single Case Efficacy Design (HSCED) model. In our view, each of the three models has taken significant steps forward in adapting particular aspects of the legal process as viable psychotherapy research procedures. In this commentary we summarize the HSCED method, then take readers through the issues of the sources of the evidence used; ways in which that evidence is tested; claims, burden and standard of proof; and the handling of the adjudication process itself. We conclude with recommendations for further development of adjudicated case study methods.
|Keywords:||adjudicated case study method, panel of psychological inquiry, research jury method, hermeneutic single-case efficacy design, psychotherapy research, evidence, burden of proof, cross-examination, case studies, clinical case studies, Social pathology. Social and public welfare|
|Subjects:||Social Sciences > Social pathology. Social and public welfare|
|Department:||Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences (HaSS) > School of Psychological Science and Health > Counselling|
|Depositing user:||Pure Administrator|
|Date Deposited:||27 Feb 2012 09:32|
|Last modified:||02 Apr 2017 07:50|