What Are Case Studies Good For? A Response to Commentaries by McMullen and Karlin

S. R. Hamburg
{"title":"What Are Case Studies Good For? A Response to Commentaries by McMullen and Karlin","authors":"S. R. Hamburg","doi":"10.14713/pcsp.v13i4.2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I am grateful to Linda McMullen (2018) and Robert Karlin (2018), for their commentaries on my case studies of Margie and Amie (Hamburg, 2018). Although case studies do not permit strong claims regarding treatment efficacy, they allow strong claims for the plausibility that treatments are efficacious. From a pragmatic standpoint, that is sufficient to justify proposing the treatments to other practitioners to be tried and tested by them, thereby ultimately contributing to the sum total of psychotherapy craft knowledge. On the topic of the placebo effect, the perspectives of researchers and clinicians, based as they are on different kinds of knowledge, can differ to the point of irreconcilability. What have hitherto been characterized as non-specific contributors to treatment outcome might better be classified as specific factors yet to be identified.","PeriodicalId":53239,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy","volume":"13 1","pages":"348-352"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14713/pcsp.v13i4.2023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

I am grateful to Linda McMullen (2018) and Robert Karlin (2018), for their commentaries on my case studies of Margie and Amie (Hamburg, 2018). Although case studies do not permit strong claims regarding treatment efficacy, they allow strong claims for the plausibility that treatments are efficacious. From a pragmatic standpoint, that is sufficient to justify proposing the treatments to other practitioners to be tried and tested by them, thereby ultimately contributing to the sum total of psychotherapy craft knowledge. On the topic of the placebo effect, the perspectives of researchers and clinicians, based as they are on different kinds of knowledge, can differ to the point of irreconcilability. What have hitherto been characterized as non-specific contributors to treatment outcome might better be classified as specific factors yet to be identified.
案例研究有什么好处?对麦克马伦和卡林评论的回应
我感谢Linda McMullen(2018)和Robert Karlin(2018)对我的Margie和Amie案例研究的评论(汉堡,2018)。尽管案例研究不允许对治疗效果提出强有力的主张,但它们允许对治疗有效的合理性提出强有力的要求。从实用的角度来看,这足以证明向其他从业者提出治疗方法是合理的,由他们尝试和测试,从而最终贡献心理治疗工艺知识的总和。在安慰剂效应的话题上,研究人员和临床医生基于不同类型的知识,他们的观点可能会差异到不可调和的地步。迄今为止被描述为治疗结果的非特异性因素的因素可能更好地被归类为有待确定的特定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信