Anecdotal, Statistical, and Causal Evidence: Their Perceived and Actual Persuasiveness

Claims about the occurrence of future events play an important role in pragmatic argumentation. Such claims can be supported by inductive arguments employing anecdotal, statistical, or causal evidence. In an experiment, the actual and perceived persuasiveness of these three types of evidence were assessed. A total of 324 participants read a newspaper article in which it was claimed that the building of a cultural centre would be profitable. This claim was supported by either anecdotal, statistical or causal evidence. The statistical evidence proved to be more convincing than the anecdotal and causal evidence. Although the latter two evidence types were equally unconvincing, the anecdotal evidence was perceived as less persuasive than the causal evidence. Therefore, the actual and perceived persuasiveness of the evidence did not correspond. These results partly replicate the results obtained in previous experiments. They also underscore the need to distinguish between the perceived and the actual persuasiveness of an argument.     

The ethics of belief: doxastic self-control and intellectual virtue

Most of the literature on doxastic voluntarism has concentrated on the question of the voluntariness of belief and the issue of how our actual or possible control of our beliefs bears on our justification for holding them and on how, in the light of this control, our intellectual character should be assessed. This paper largely concerns a related question on which less philosophical work has been done: the voluntariness of the grounding of belief and the bearing of various views about this matter on justification, knowledge, and intellectual virtue. In part, my concern is the nature and extent of our voluntary control over our responses to reasons for believing—or over what we take to be such reasons. This paper provides a partial account of such control and, on the basis of the account, will clarify the criteria for appraising intellectual virtue.     

Changes of the Health Service System and the Search for Evidence and Rationality

The health service systems of the Western world are transforming rapidly. These systems are under pressure from an increase of new biomedical possibilities for intervention in the processes of the human body, from the rising expectations of the public, and from demographic developments that are leading to an increase in the number of elderly people in the Western world. Parallel to these changes on the macro level there are major changes on the micro level, that is, there is a search for methods to manage the basic way that the health system functions. In short, the financing, organization and practice of medicine will be changed considerably over the next 5-10 years. In the search for a harmonious development in this field the concept "evidence" must be seen in a broad perspective that encompasses, among other things, the increasing multidisciplinary nature of modern medicine.     

Managing terror when self-worth and worldviews collide: Evidence that mortality salience increases reluctance to self-enhance beyond authorities

Terror management theory posits that one’s self-esteem and worldview operate jointly to manage mortality concerns. Accordingly, past research shows that mortality salience (MS) increases self-enhancement and worldview defense. The current research is the first to examine MS effects when self-enhancement threatens to undermine aspects of the worldview, in this case the credibility and status of worldview-representative authorities. MS led to reluctance to self-enhance following positive personality test feedback when the test was judged negatively by institutional authorities (Study 1a), as well as unwillingness to contradict self-esteem threatening feedback sanctioned by authorities (Study 1b). Mortality salient participants also rated themselves higher on valued dimensions unless it meant viewing themselves more positively than their parents (Study 2) and admired political icons (Study 3). Taken together, these results show that MS increases self-enhancement unless doing so challenges important representatives of the worldview. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Housing and Child Welfare: Emerging Evidence and Implications for Scaling up Services

Inadequate housing threatens family stability in communities across the United States. This study reviews emerging evidence on housing interventions in the context of scale‐up for the child welfare system. In child welfare, scale‐up refers to the extent to which fully implemented interventions sustainably alleviate family separations associated with housing instability. It incorporates multiple aspects beyond traditional measures of effectiveness including costs, potential reach, local capacities for implementation, and fit within broader social services. The framework further encompasses everyday circumstances faced by service providers, program administrators, and policymakers who allocate resources under conditions of scarcity and uncertainty. The review of current housing interventions reveals a number of systemic constraints for scale‐up in child welfare. Reliance on rental assistance programs limits capacity to address demand, while current practices that target the most vulnerable families may inadvertently diminish effectiveness of the intervention and increase overall demand. Alternative approaches that focus on homelessness prevention and early intervention must be tested in conjunction with community initiatives to increase accessibility of affordable housing. By examining system performance over time, the scalability framework provides an opportunity for more efficient coordination of housing services within and outside of the child welfare system.     

Couple and Family Treatments: Study Quality and Level of Evidence

This paper examines the application of the guidelines for evidence‐based treatments in family therapy developed by Sexton and collaborators to a set of treatment models. These guidelines classify the models using criteria that take into account the distinctive features of couple and family treatments. A two‐step approach was taken: (1) The quality of each of the studies supporting the treatment models was assessed according to a list of ad hoc core criteria; (2) the level of evidence of each treatment model was determined using the guidelines. To reflect the stages of empirical validation present in the literature, nine models were selected: three models each with high, moderate, and low levels of empirical validation, determined by the number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). The quality ratings highlighted the strengths and limitations of each of the studies that provided evidence backing the treatment models. The classification by level of evidence indicated that four of the models were level III, “evidence‐based” treatments; one was a level II, “evidence‐informed treatment with promising preliminary evidence‐based results”; and four were level I, “evidence‐informed” treatments. Using the guidelines helped identify treatments that are solid in terms of not only the number of RCTs but also the quality of the evidence supporting the efficacy of a given treatment. From a research perspective, this analysis highlighted areas to be addressed before some models can move up to a higher level of evidence. From a clinical perspective, the guidelines can help identify the models whose studies have produced clinically relevant results.