As a follow-up to my last post, there are three frames of reference that are important to my thinking about being evidence-based.
- The unit of analysis is action, not thinking. Evidence-based programs are often focussed on decision-making, but action is a better focal point. Why is this? First, focusing on actions helps to make a direct connection from evidence to consequences and outcomes. Second, Our actions and thinking are closely related. Actions gets at both thinking and acting. Neuroscience has recently begun to confirm what psychology (Vygotsky) and philosophy (Wittgenstein) have believed for a while: that cognition is closely tied to muscle control and acting. That there is a neurological link between doing and thinking.
- Evidence-based information is best directed toward practices, processes or programs. Much of the evidence-based literature is directed toward decision-making. and while this is important, many aspects of practice are made up of decision that are organized by repeatable processes, programs or protocols. The intense effort that is sometimes needed in order to be evidence-based may be more justified in the wider effect sen in focusing on the programs and processes that support everyday decision-making.
- The basis for most thoughtful actions is theory or belief. These may range from extensively developed nomothetic theoretical networks to well-founded beliefs, but the relevance of evidence-based information is on it’s effect upon these beliefs and theories that in turn guide decisions and program actions. There is no such thing as facts without theory or belief. The role of evidence is to support (or fail to support) the beliefs that underly actions.