Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T00:06:56.584Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

7 - What Is This Thing Called “Efficacy”?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Nancy Cartwright
Affiliation:
London School of Economics Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method
C. Mantzavinos
Affiliation:
Witten/Herdecke University
Get access

Summary

The Topic

This chapter is about efficacy, effectiveness, the need for theory to join the two, and the tragedies of exporting the Cochrane medical-inspired ideology to social policy. Loosely, efficacy is what is established about causes in RCTs – randomized controlled trials. Effectiveness is what a cause does “in the field.” The theory, like that describing forces in mechanics, underwrites the assumption that the cause contributes the same effect in the field as in the experiment. The tragedies are multiple and snowball on from one another. On conventional Cochrane Collaboration doctrine, following the model of testing pharmaceuticals, the RCT is the gold standard for evidence of effectiveness in evidence-based policy. The first tragedy is that on dominant characterizations of “efficacy,” including, especially, many that try hard to be scientific, it does not make sense to suppose that efficacies make any difference outside experiments. The second tragedy is that once “efficacy” is characterized so that it does make sense, the RCT can hardly be a gold standard since it goes no way toward establishing the theory, or more loosely the story or account, that it takes to get out of the experiment and into the field. The third tragedy is that much of the teaching about evidence-based policy pays little attention to the need for such theories or accounts. Indeed there is often the suggestion that RCTs should replace such accounts since the accounts are almost always controversial.

Type
Chapter
Information
Philosophy of the Social Sciences
Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice
, pp. 185 - 206
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andrews, G. (1999). “Efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency in mental health service delivery,” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 33: 316–322.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bohrnstedt, G. W. and Stecher, B. M. (eds.) 2002. “What We Have Learned About Class Size Reduction in California,” California Department of Education.
Dawid, A. P. 2000. “Inference without counterfactuals,” Journal of the American Statistical Association 95(450): 407–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawid, A. P. 2007. “Counterfactuals, Hypotheticals and Potential Responses: A Philosophical Examination of Statistical Causality.” In Russo, F. and Williamson, J. (eds.) Causality and Probability in the Sciences. London: College Publications, Texts in Philosophy Series 5: 503–532.Google Scholar
,DWP (Department of Work and Pensions) 2006. Opportunity for All. Eighth Annual Report 2006, Strategy Document.
Machamer, P., Darden, L., and Craver, C. F. 2000. “Thinking about mechanisms,” Philosophy of Science 67(1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, K. 2001. “Randomised controlled trials for evidence-based education: Some problems in judging ‘what works’,” Evaluation and Research in Education 15(2): 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, B., Hedges, L. V., and Konstantopolous, S. 2000. “The effects of small classes on academic achievement: The results of the Tennessee class size experiment,” American Educational Research Journal 37(1): 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, D. 1978. “Bayesian inference for causal effects: The role of randomization,” The Annals of Statistics 6(1):34–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×