Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology Fails to Be Tripartite: A Conceptual Critique of the Scientocentrism in Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology

28Citations
Citations of this article
74Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This paper criticises evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP) for not actually being a tripartite model. According to the American Psychological Association, EBPP is defined as the integration of the best available research with clinical expertise in the context of patient characteristics, culture, and preferences. Nonetheless, EBPP fails to be a tripartite model because it is defined by science alone. This paper aims at explaining why this conflation may have come about. It also shows why clinical expertise and patient preferences should be defined extra-scientifically.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Berg, H. (2019). Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology Fails to Be Tripartite: A Conceptual Critique of the Scientocentrism in Evidence-Based Practice in Psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02253

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free