Clarifying realist analytic and interdisciplinary consensus processes in a complex health intervention

A worked example of Judgemental Rationality in action

Bibliographic Data

ID12568205
AuthorsSarah Rybczynska‐bunt (0000-0002-4284-1081, corresponding author), Lauren Weston (0000-0001-8735-2292), Richard Byng (0000-0001-7411-9467), Alex Stirzaker (University of Plymouth), Charlotte Lennox (0000-0001-9014-9965, University of Manchester), Mark Pearson (0000-0002-0541-3301, University of Hull), Sarah Brand (0000-0001-5979-2442, University of Exeter), Mike Maguire (0000-0002-8379-6475, University of South Wales), Graham Durcan (0000-0001-7947-0651, Centre for Mental Health), J Graham (0000-0001-8863-7978), Sarah Léonard (0000-0001-8511-3829), Jenny Shaw (0000-0003-2569-7687), Tim Kirkpatrick (0000-0002-1693-0742, University of Manchester), C Owens (0000-0001-9846-0889, University of Exeter), Cath Quinn (0000-0003-4644-4603, University of Plymouth)
Year2021
Volume27
Issue4
Pages473-491
Publication date2021-08-23
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueEvaluation (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1356-3890 • E-ISSN: 1461-7153
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/13563890211037699
OpenAlexW3195872727
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited16

Judgemental rationality is infrequently referenced within discussions of Realist Evaluations. Judgemental rationality refers to researchers’ capacity to assess which, potential, meanings provide the most credible explanations. In evaluation work, rationale for analysis is provided, though rarely do we see how an evaluator made judgements between competing theories, and which theories were discarded and why. We provide a worked example of the application of judgemental rationality. The Engager intervention offered support to prison leavers with common mental health problems. The data for 24, purposively sampled, participants from the intervention arm of the trial were integrated. Bhaskar’s DREIC, a five-step analytical procedure, was used to transfactually theorise and interrogate the inferences made within, and across, cases. The findings demonstrated that the intervention was more effective when practitioners developed an in-depth understanding of the participant. We recommend that intervention developers look for ways to enhance therapeutic competencies and judgemental rationality in practitioner teams

Action (physics · Criminology · Epistemology · Intervention (counseling · Prison · Psychiatry · Rationality · Sociology · Critical Realism in Sociology · Mental Health and Psychiatry · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access