Different approaches in the assessment of audiological rehabilitation: a meta-theoretical perspective.
The aim of this article is to highlight some elements (e.g. the view on truth, causality, context and methods) in three different meta-theoretical approaches to assessment and to discuss their implications: external realism, critical realism, and anti-realism. Although there are many differences between external realism and anti-realism, their main shortcoming is the failure to answer one of the basic questions in assessment research: 'What works for whom in what circumstances?' In order to answer this question, one needs a deep-structure ontology and a theory including mechanisms and contexts, which one finds in critical realism. An adequate approach to an evaluation process can be described as follows. The point of departure is a theory describing how mechanisms work in context and what the expected outcomes are. Hypotheses are formulated suggesting answers to the question 'What might work for whom in what circumstances? Data are collected in order to answer the question. Different methods are used which can shed light on the phenomenon. The outcome of the evaluation process is to find the conditions under which a specific outcome is produced.
Danermark
Berth
B
Swedish Institute for Disability Research, Orebro University, Orebro, Sweden. berth.danermark@ivo.oru.se
D012048:Correction of Hearing Impairment; D005069:Evaluation Studies as Topic; D006302:Health Services Research / Q000379:methods; D006801:Humans; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care