Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Keywords

Argument structure, Cartwright, EBP, evidence, holism, model, model merging, practical reasoning, RCT, Toulmin

Start Date

18-5-2016 9:00 AM

End Date

21-5-2016 5:00 PM

Abstract

The context for this paper is evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is about production of desirable change. The evidence should come from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To make sense of RCT evidence it must be placed in an argument structure. I compare two different models, Toulmin and Cartwright, and investigate whether the two models can be merged into one. I shall argue that such merging is not feasible.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Reader's Reactions

David Hitchcock, Commentary on Tone Kvernbekk’s “Comparing two models of evidence” (May 2016)

Share

COinS
 
May 18th, 9:00 AM May 21st, 5:00 PM

Comparing Two Models of Evidence

University of Windsor

The context for this paper is evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is about production of desirable change. The evidence should come from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To make sense of RCT evidence it must be placed in an argument structure. I compare two different models, Toulmin and Cartwright, and investigate whether the two models can be merged into one. I shall argue that such merging is not feasible.