please can you remove me from this list
Elizabeth

________________________________________
From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Trish Greenhalgh [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 14 June 2016 16:02
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Realism and Erthnography

Nick

You slightly misrepresent me! When I presented that Œcontinuum¹ I issued a
health warning, said it was a gross oversimplification and intended to do
no more than help people begin to get into the philosophy of different
methodological approaches.  A lot of people found it helpful for that
reason.  Like all simplified models, it falls apart quickly on deeper
anlaysis but that doesn¹t mean it wasn¹t useful at the time for helping
people get onto the first step of the ladder.



Trisha Greenhalgh
Professor of Primary Care Health Sciences




















T: +44 (0)1865
617816
PA: Karen Morecroft [log in to unmask]
E: [log in to unmask]
www.phc.ox.ac.uk <http://www.phc.ox.ac.uk> | @OxPrimaryCare
<http://www.twitter.com/oxprimarycare> | @trishgreenhalgh
<http://www.twitter.com/oxprimarycare>
Nuffield Department
of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford

Radcliffe Primary Care Building,
Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG





On 14/06/2016 15:54, "Nick Emmel" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Dear Sara (and all),
>
>This is a fascinating discussion and I found your presentation very
>useful and interesting. A couple of points. I remember Trish's point
>about realism connecting positivism to constructivism from the CARES
>conference. I disagreed with it then and I disagree with this continuum
>now.
>Positivism and constructivism are connected, as I have argued in my book
>on Sampling and choosing cases, by the flatness of their ontology and
>their empiricism. Realism, with its stratified ontology lies above (and
>below) this continuum between positivism and constructivism, but
>certainly not between them.
>CMOs are constructed, but I think we need to make a distinction between
>weak constructions and strong constructions. Again, as I argue in
>Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: a realist approach:
>
>Individual cases may be different configurations of context, mechanism,
>and outcome. Each a tentative realist explanation that links ideas and
>evidence. These descriptions are only weak constructions and as such we
>should not be waylaid by acts of assigning evidence and ideas to context,
>mechanism, and outcome. Fruitless hours can be spent trying to work out
>if some part of this weak construction is context, or mechanism, or
>outcome. The effort is far better spent ensuring that evidence and ideas
>are adequately represented in the strongly explanatory account of the
>cases in the research. Each case will be carried forward to offer direct
>support or rejection of theories. Together, the cases purposefully bring
>together bundles of configurations of ideas and evidence in a system
>built to compare, juxtapose, judge, and interpret these ideas.
>
>But there is a conundrum in this, which I'm trying to work out--is it all
>about testing and refining evidence against middle range theories, or is
>there something more about critical theory at work here. You cite John
>Snow's case of the brewery workers in Soho later in your presentation.
>These workers, as Snow notes in his book, drank malt liquor supplied by
>the brewery and none died of cholera, unlike their unfortunate neighbours
>who drank water from the Broad Street pump. The inmates of a nearby
>workhouse with its own pump-well were also saved. Snow collects case
>after case from epidemic after epidemic in London and throughout England
>to test his theory that cholera was transmitted in water. The story about
>maps drawn and water handles taken off in Broad Street are nonsense
>invented largely by an American epidemiologist Wade Hampton Frost, who
>rediscovered Snow in the 1930s. Maybe Snow's most appealing work is his
>natural experiment comparing cholera mortality in populations supplied
>through different water sources on the Thames. He found the relative risk
>of contracting cholera from the Lambeth Water Company, which drew its
>water from within London, was 5.7 times higher than for those who drank
>water supplied by Southwark and Vauxhall Company drawing its water from
>above London. Compelling, yet at the same time, William Farr estimated
>that those living in the Thames basin were over 14 times more likely to
>die of cholera than those living in the lofty uplands of Hampstead. Farr
>argued that cholera was carried in the miasma, the effluvia and
>pollutants that infested the river side of the Thames. Farr's theory held
>sway. Snow's theory of water borne disease would have to wait for far
>more conclusive microscopic evidence-Koch's rediscovery of V. cholera in
>1883--25 years after Snow's death.
>And my conundrum, if I'd been a realist in London in the 1850s I would
>have gone with William Farr and the miasmic theory of disease. The
>evidence and theory fit, the weakly constructed theory leads me to worry,
>like William Farr did, as to where it was safest to be in a cholera
>epidemic (answer--shooting grouse on the moors of Yorkshire, given that
>epidemics always happened in August when shooting grouse is what the
>upper English classes do at that time of year). Or do we need to add
>contrarian to the list of features realist researchers need to be? In
>which case I might have followed Snow's lead, gone with the minority
>view, and held fast to a theory that really did not at the time stand up
>to the empirical evidence and was only held by a small group of
>progressive (alternative) and critical clinicians.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Nick
>
>Nick Emmel | School of Sociology and Social Policy | University of Leeds
>|Leeds |LS2 9JT
>+44 (0) 113 343 6958 | Twitter @NickEmmel | Blog
>http://realistmethods.wordpress.com/
>Emmel ND (2013) Sampling and choosing cases in qualitative research: a
>realist approach. London. Sage. http://goo.gl/yYydFd
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Sara Van Belle
>Sent: 14 June 2016 08:37
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Realism and Erthnography
>
>Dear Justin,
>
>I delivered a presentation (some method musings...) on realist evaluation
>and methods in anthropology during the MAGIC 2015 conference of European
>social anthropologists last year (see attached).
>Would be great to further exchange...
>
>Enjoy,
>
>Sara Van Belle
>Post-Doctoral fellow
>Institute of Tropical Medicine, Antwerp, Belgium
>From: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of
>Trish Greenhalgh
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Reply-To: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving
>Standards" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, Trish
>Greenhalgh
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Date: Tuesday 14 June 2016 at 06:32
>To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Subject: Re: Realism and Erthnography
>
>Justin and all
>Personally, I think COMs are a social construction. There, I've said it.
>Good discussion!
>
>Trisha Greenhalgh
>Professor of Primary Care Health Sciences
>
>[cid:D9751AC9-943C-462D-9AB4-815500AB7336]
>T: +44 (0)1865 617816
>PA: Karen Morecroft
>[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>E: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>www.phc.ox.ac.uk<http://www.phc.ox.ac.uk> |
>@OxPrimaryCare<http://www.twitter.com/oxprimarycare> |
>@trishgreenhalgh<http://www.twitter.com/oxprimarycare>
>Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford
>Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, Woodstock
>Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG
>
>From: Justin McNab
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Reply-To: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving
>Standards" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>,
>Justin McNab
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Date: Tuesday, 14 June 2016 01:24
>To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Subject: Realism and Erthnography
>
>Dear Becky
>
>I am a medical anthropologist currently working in the field
>implementation science, evaluation etc - for the last 6 years or so
>around integration and co-ordination of care for the chronically ill.
>
>As a social anthropologist I have been aware, for many years, of the
>great importance of context (in all its myriad guises and forms) so the
>realist approach, while interesting, was not the revelation to me it was
>for some others who work with strict program logic approaches to
>evaluation etc. I attended the Liverpool CARES conference at the end of
>2014 and found it interesting and informative, and was heartened that
>those employing realist approaches are a broad multi-disciplinary church
>with room for those right up the positivist end of the scale to those
>right up the interpretive constructionist end of the spectrum. As a
>social anthropologist I am, perhaps not surprisingly, more up the
>interpretive constructionist end of the 'realist scale'.
>
>I very much like your take on the 'realist movement' for want of a better
>way of putting it. I agree wholeheartedly with your view that CMOs are a
>tool to think with and aid in the production of knowledge, and clearly,
>as you also say, that realist approaches are a flexible and interpretive
>approach to understanding and explaining complex phenomena rather than a
>method.
>
>Of course, as an anthropologist, I'm not so interested in certainty and a
>rigid application of a realist approach and identification CMO bundles.
>
>Anyway, all a bit of a rambling introduction to say I am very interested
>in your ideas on realist approaches to ethnography. I will not be able to
>attend your workshop (or the CARES conference) this year but would be
>very interested in any presentations, materials etc you might make
>publicly available.
>
>Regards
>
>Justin McNab
>
>JUSTIN McNAB | Lecturer in Health Policy | Research Fellow Menzies Centre
>for Health Policy THE UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY Level 6 The Hub, Charles
>Perkins Centre D17 | The University of Sydney | NSW | 2006 T +61 2 9036
>7004 E [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>http://<http://www.menzieshealthpolicy.edu.au/>www.sydney.edu.au/menzies-h
>ealth-policy
>CRICOS 00026A
>This email plus any attachments to it are confidential. Any unauthorised
>use is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please
>delete it and any attachments.
>Please think of our environment and only print this e-mail if necessary.
>
>
>
>
>From: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of
>"Hardwick, Rebecca"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Reply-To: "Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving
>Standards" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>,
>"Hardwick, Rebecca"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Date: Friday, 10 June 2016 7:02 pm
>To: "[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>"
><[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>Subject: Re: CARES 2016 - Registration now open!
>
>Hi Alan,
>
>Personally, my take on the whole CMO thing, is that CMOs are "just" a
>tool to think with, to help the researcher in her task of organising her
>thoughts, with programme theory development and refinement. I think
>they're an aid to producing knowledge.
>
>I also think that as realist approaches are an approach to understanding
>and explaining complex phenomena, and not a method per se, then they are
>open to both flex and interpretation.  This is a good thing, but our
>human tendency is to want certainty, which the CMO configuration can
>(?mistakenly) offer. That's why I think sometimes it gets the airtime it
>does.
>
>I am hopeful that there will be use of CMOs in work presented at the
>conference, as I think the CMO is a useful construct when used in the
>task of producing knowledge (rather than an end in itself), but like you,
>I also hope there will be opportunities to reflect on different ways that
>scientific realism can be interpreted and used.   For my part, I will be
>running a session on a realist approach in ethnography, and currently I
>think it would be quite unlikely that would only focus on CMOs.
>
>Hope that helps,
>
>Cheers,
>Becky.
>
>
>Rebecca Hardwick
>PhD Student
>
>01392 727408
>Email:  [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
>From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alan Taylor
>Sent: 10 June 2016 01:19
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: CARES 2016 - Registration now open!
>
>Hi All,
>
>Thanks for the notice on the workshops. Can I ask a frank question?
>
>I do not find the rigid Context-Mechanism-Outcome formula very useful. It
>is too static for me to help explain the struggles that take place over
>and within contexts, mechanisms and outcomes. Nevertheless the (critical)
>realist approach is an advance that should be valued.
>
>Given this I am wondering if attendance at the CARES conference or
>workshops would be worth the investment in time and money if only the
>strict CMO approach is going to be the main theme, or will there be
>opportunities to explore challenges and development of these methods?
>
>Any views would be most welcome!
>
>Regards,
>Alan Taylor
>
>From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jagosh, Justin
>Sent: Friday, 10 June 2016 8:10 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: CARES 2016 - Registration now open!
>
>Dear Colleagues,
>I am pleased to announce that registration is now open for the 2nd
>International CARES Conference and can be accessed via the University of
>Liverpool's online store:
>
>ttp://payments.liv.ac.uk/browse/product.asp?compid=1&modid=2&catid=70<http
>s://owa.liv.ac.uk/owa/redir.aspx?REF=6W56RkXqM9oo4fmm7HNJC76aWLVoA-t3ejzdD
>f9DFKnUrjHorJDTCAFodHRwOi8vcGF5bWVudHMubGl2LmFjLnVrL2Jyb3dzZS9wcm9kdWN0LmF
>zcD9jb21waWQ9MSZtb2RpZD0yJmNhdGlkPTcw>
>
>if the link doesn't work type:
>http://payments.liv.ac.uk
>and then 'Conferences &Events' and then 'Events at Liverpool' and then
>'CARES'
>
>For Professionals -     a reminder that early bird prices end on July
>15th.
>For Students -             the student rate is deeply discounted and
>there are only 80 spaces. It is in your best interest to register early!
>
>For fee information, please visit the on-line store, or
>www.liv.ac.uk/cares.<http://www.liv.ac.uk/cares.>
>
>The CARES conference planning committee has assembled a diverse range of
>pre-conference workshops and a post-conference day to be held at the
>University of Liverpool, London Campus. Please see attached file for
>workshop descriptions - and please feel free to circulate in your
>networks.
>
>Note that you can register for the pre-conference day even if you are not
>planning on attending the conference - click on 'pre-conference day only'
>when registering through the on-line store.
>
>Information and special rates for hotel accommodation around the venue
>will be announced soon! stay tuned...
>
>sincerely,
>Justin
>
>2nd International Conference on Realist Evaluation and Synthesis:
>Advancing Principles, Strengthening Practice October 2nd - 6th, 2016
>University of Liverpool, London Campus Barbican Conference Centre London
>Justin Jagosh, Ph.D Senior Research Fellow Centre for Advancement in
>Realist Evaluation and Synthesis (CARES) University of Liverpool, United
>Kingdom www.liverpool.ac.uk/cares<http://www.liverpool.ac.uk/cares>
>
>P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
>
>Disclaimer: Http://www.itg.be/disclaimer
>
>Directions to our location(s): http://g.co/maps/ua89b