Dalkin Sonia Michelle, Greenhalgh Joanne, Jones Diana, Cunningham Bill, Lhussier Monique
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Northumbria University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK.
Implement Sci. 2015 Apr 16;10:49. doi: 10.1186/s13012-015-0237-x.
The idea that underlying, generative mechanisms give rise to causal regularities has become a guiding principle across many social and natural science disciplines. A specific form of this enquiry, realist evaluation is gaining momentum in the evaluation of complex social interventions. It focuses on 'what works, how, in which conditions and for whom' using context, mechanism and outcome configurations as opposed to asking whether an intervention 'works'. Realist evaluation can be difficult to codify and requires considerable researcher reflection and creativity. As such there is often confusion when operationalising the method in practice. This article aims to clarify and further develop the concept of mechanism in realist evaluation and in doing so aid the learning of those operationalising the methodology.
Using a social science illustration, we argue that disaggregating the concept of mechanism into its constituent parts helps to understand the difference between the resources offered by the intervention and the ways in which this changes the reasoning of participants. This in turn helps to distinguish between a context and mechanism. The notion of mechanisms 'firing' in social science research is explored, with discussions surrounding how this may stifle researchers' realist thinking. We underline the importance of conceptualising mechanisms as operating on a continuum, rather than as an 'on/off' switch. The discussions in this article will hopefully progress and operationalise realist methods. This development is likely to occur due to the infancy of the methodology and its recent increased profile and use in social science research. The arguments we present have been tested and are explained throughout the article using a social science illustration, evidencing their usability and value.
潜在的生成机制产生因果规律这一观点已成为许多社会科学和自然科学学科的指导原则。这种探究的一种具体形式,即实在论评估,在复杂社会干预评估中越来越受到关注。它关注的是“什么起作用、如何起作用、在何种条件下起作用以及对谁起作用”,使用背景、机制和结果配置,而不是询问一项干预措施是否“有效”。实在论评估可能难以编纂,需要研究者进行大量的反思和发挥创造力。因此,在实践中运用该方法时常常会产生困惑。本文旨在阐明并进一步发展实在论评估中机制的概念,从而帮助那些运用该方法的人进行学习。
通过一个社会科学实例,我们认为将机制概念分解为其组成部分有助于理解干预措施所提供的资源与这一资源改变参与者推理方式之间的差异。这反过来有助于区分背景和机制。探讨了社会科学研究中机制“触发”的概念,并讨论了这可能如何抑制研究者的实在论思维。我们强调将机制概念化为在一个连续体上运作而不是作为一个“开/关”开关的重要性。本文中的讨论有望推动实在论方法的发展并使其可操作化。由于该方法尚处于初期阶段,且最近在社会科学研究中的关注度和应用有所增加,这种发展很可能会出现。我们提出的论点已经经过检验,并在整篇文章中通过一个社会科学实例进行解释,证明了它们的实用性和价值。