title: Research-based knowledge in psychology: what, if anything, is its incremental value to the practitioner?
abstract: This essay reflects an ongoing dialogue between a clinician versed in mainstream psychological research and theory, and a social psychologist with experience both as a researcher and contributor to applied undertakings in various domains about the "incremental value" of research-based knowledge-that is, its value beyond that provided by the other sources of knowledge available to the practitioner. These sources include knowledge about the needs and coping strategies of all human beings, as well as knowledge both about the specific life circumstances of those one is seeking to help, and knowledge about language and culture. Examples from the clinical practice of the first author are offered, coupled with in-principle arguments about the underspecified and contingent nature of research-based generalizations. By way of rebuttal, examples of arguably useful findings are provided by the second author-especially findings that serve as correctives to biases in lay psychology (notably unwarranted "dispositionism") and to widespread shortcomings in judgment and decision-making (particularly, Kahneman and Tversky's work on "prospect theory" ). Both authors agree on the value of a "bricoleur" treatment strategy that relies on careful attention to the specifics of the case at hand and avoids one-size-fits-all applications of theory and prior research, and both agree that research-based findings are more useful in predicting behavior and designing intervention strategies that apply to groups and large samples of individuals rather than single actors. A concluding discussion focuses on necessary criteria and strategies for increasing the usefulness of laboratory and field research for the practitioner.
authors.affiliation: Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
authors.forename: Jan
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Smedslund
authors.forename: Lee
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Ross
mesh_terms: D035841:Behavioral Research; D055317:Evidence-Based Practice; D006801:Humans; D019359:Knowledge; D011586:Psychology, Clinical
references.citation: Lancet. 1995 May 6;345(8958):1131-4
references.pmid: 7723543
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2011 Aug 2;108(31):12653-6
references.pmid: 21768362
references.citation: Qual Saf Health Care. 2003 Aug;12(4):304-11; discussion 311-2
references.pmid: 12897366
references.citation: J Abnorm Psychol. 1969 Jun;74(3):271-80
references.pmid: 4896551
references.citation: Science. 2003 Nov 21;302(5649):1338-9
references.pmid: 14631022
references.citation: N Engl J Med. 1982 May 27;306(21):1259-62
references.pmid: 7070445
references.citation: Science. 2009 Apr 17;324(5925):400-3
references.pmid: 19372432
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Jan;92(1):82-96
references.pmid: 17201544
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 2004 Jul;111(3):781-99
references.pmid: 15250784
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990 Apr;58(4):568-81
references.pmid: 2348359
references.citation: Child Dev. 2007 Jan-Feb;78(1):246-63
references.pmid: 17328703
references.citation: Science. 1989 Mar 31;243(4899):1668-74
references.pmid: 2648573
references.citation: Science. 2011 Mar 18;331(6023):1447-51
references.pmid: 21415354
references.citation: Annu Rev Psychol. 1998;49:259-87
references.pmid: 15012470