Abstract
Despite advances in practitioner-researcher partnerships, barriers to the uptake of research evidence in practice sectors that address intimate partner violence (IPV) persist. The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine how practitioners across victim services, criminal justice, and law enforcement systems assess the usefulness and credibility of research evidence to their practice and policy-related decision making. Data were derived through qualitative interviews with 37 representatives of victim services, criminal justice, and law enforcement organizations in the state of Washington. Practitioners were asked to describe the criteria and processes used to determine the credibility and usefulness of research evidence they encounter. Practitioners across systems reported that the identity and credibility of the messenger conveying the research evidence, the relevance and applicability of the research to their own practice context, and the rigor of the methods used to derive the evidence are important criteria in assessing its utility and trustworthiness. A subset of respondents reported a suspicion of the research enterprise altogether, and/or a lack of resources available to engage with research evidence. Given the centrality of the messengers of research evidence in practitioners’ assessment of its credibility, IPV systems may be well-served to more deeply invest in research to practice intermediaries who are adequately resourced to translate evidence across sectors. Additional practice and research implications are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Allen, N. E. (2006). An examination of the effectiveness of domestic violence coordinating councils. Violence Against Women, 12, 46–67.
Auchter, B., & Backes, B. L. (2013). NIJ’s program of domestic violence research: Collaborative efforts to build knowledge guided by safety for victims and accountability for perpetrators. Violence Against Women, 19, 713–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801213494703.
Ayres, L., Kavanaugh, K., & Knafl, K. A. (2003). Within-case and across-case approaches to qualitative data analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 13(6), 871–883. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303013006008.
Boardman, A. G., Arguelles, M. E., Vaugn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Klinger, J. (2008). Special education teachers’ view of research-based practices. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 168–180.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Buckley, H., Tommyr, L., Lewig, K., & Jack, S. (2014). Factors influencing the uptake of research evidence in child welfare: A synthesis of findings from Australia, Canada, and Ireland. Child Abuse Review, 23, 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2262.
Cherney, A., Head, B., Povey, J., Ferguson, M., & Boreham, P. (2015). Use of academic social research by public officials: Exploring preferences and constraints that impact on research use. Evidence & Policy, 11, 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426514X14138926450067.
Eccles, M., & Mittman, B. (2006). Welcome to Implementation Science. Implementation Science, 1(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-1.
Ghaffar, A., Langlois, E. V., Rasanathan, K., Peterson, S., Adedokun, L., & Tran, N. T. (2017). Strengthening health systems through embedded research. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 95(2), 87. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.16.189126.
Goodmark, L. (2012). A troubled marriage: Domestic violence and the legal system. New York: NYU Press.
Green, L. W. (2008). Making research relevant: If it is an evidence-based practice, where’s the practice based evidence? Family Practice, 5, i20–i24. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn055.
Honig, M. I., & Coburn, C. (2008). Evidence-based decision making in school district central offices: Toward a policy and research agenda. Educational Policy, 22, 578–608. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904807307067.
Jackson, E. L., Coleman, J., Strikes with a Gun, G, & Sweet Grass, D. (2015). Threading, stitching, and storytelling: Using CBPR and Blackfoot knowledge and cultural practices to improve domestic violence services for indigenous women. Journal of Indigenous Social Development, 4, 1–27.
Kaukinen, C., Anderson, K., Jasinkski, J. L., Mustaine, E. E., Powers, R. A., Miller, M. H., Jennings, W. G., Nobles, M., & Yegidis, B. (2017). The direction of violence against women research and evaluation. Women and Criminal Justice, 28, 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/08974454.2017.1389670.
Lehrner, A., & Allen, N. E. (2009). Still a movement after all these years? Current tensions in the domestic violence movement. Violence Against Women, 15, 656–677.
Lindhorst, T. P., Casey, E. A., Willey-Sthapit, C., & Toews, B. (manuscript submitted for review). How research evidence is defined, acquired, and shared across systems that address intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women.
MacGregor, J., Wathen, N., Kothari, A., Hundal, P. K., & Naimi, A. (2014). Strategies to promote uptake and use of intimate partner violence and child maltreatment knowledge: An integrative review. BMC Public Health, 14(862), 1–16.
Mold, J. W., & Peterson, K. A. (2005). Primary care practice-based research networks: Working at the interface between research and quality improvement. Annals of Family Medicine, 3(supplement), S20. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.303.
Moylan, C. A., Lindhorst, T., & Tajima, E. A. (2017). Contested discourses in multidisciplinary sexual assault response teams (SARTs). Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(1), 3–22.
Murray, C. E., Smith, P. H., & Avent, J. R. (2010). Solutions to the research-practice gap in domestic violence: A modified Delphi study with domestic violence coalition leaders. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, & Trauma, 19, 424–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771003781354.
Murray, C. E., Ong, I., Smith, P. H., Foreman, T., Akers, W., Flasch, P., & Dooley, R. (2015). Linking research and practice to address domestic and sexual violence: Lessons learned from a statewide conference with researchers and practitioners. Journal of Aggression, Conflict, and Peace Research, 7(2), 76–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/JACPR-07-2014-0129.
Nelson, S. R., Leffler, J. C., & Hansen, B. A. (2009). Toward a research agenda for understanding and improving the use of research evidence. Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., & Thomas, J. (2014). A systematic review of barriers to facilitators of the use of evidence bypolicymakers. BMC Health Services Research, 14. Open Access at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/14/2.
Palinkas, L. A., Wu, Q., Fuentes, D., Finno-Valasquez, M., Holloway, I. W., Garcia, A., & Chamberlain, P. (2015). Innovation and the use of research evidence in youth-serving systems: A mixed-methods study. Child Welfare, 94, 57–85.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (4th Ed ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Rosenberg, A. (2015). Philosophy of social science (5. ed. ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.
Shorey, R. C., Tirone, V. S., & Stuart, G. L. (2014). Coordinated community response components for victims of intimate partner violence: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 19(4), 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2014.06.001.
Spangaro, J. (2007). Eleven obstacles to translating research into policy on gender-based violence. The Policy Press, 3, 553–566.
Stewart, R. E., Stirman, S. W., & Chambless, D. L. (2012). A qualitative investigation of practicing psychologists’ attitudes toward research-informed practice: Implications for dissemination strategies. Professional Psychology, Research, and Practice, 43, 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025694.
Sudderth, L. K. (2006). An uneasy alliance: Law enforcement and domestic violence victim advocates in a rural area. Feminist Criminology, 1, 329–353. https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085106293674.
Sullivan, T. P., Price, C., McPartland, T., Hunter, B. A., & Fisher, B. S. (2017). The researcher-practitioner partnership study (RPPS): Experiences from criminal justice system collaborations studying violence against women. Violence Against Women, 23, 887–907. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216650290.
Thomas, K. A., Goodman, L. A., Vainer, E. S., Heimel, D., Barkai, R., & Collins-Gousby, D. (2018). No sacred cows or bulls’: The story of the domestic violence program evaluation and research collaborative (DVPERC). Journal of Family Violence, 33, 537–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-018-9978-z.
Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, L., Blachman, M., Dunville, R., & Saul, J. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3), 171–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9174-z.
Wathen, C. N., MacGregor, J. C. D., Sibbald, S. L., & MacMilan, H. L. (2013). Exploring the uptake and framing of research evidence on universal screening for intimate partner violence against women: A knowledge translation case study. Health Research, Policy, and Systems, 11, 1–13.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by grant NIJ #2014-IJ-CX-0032 from the National Institute of Justice.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Casey, E.A., Lindhorst, T.P. & Willey-Sthapit, C. Assessing The Evidence: How Systems That Address Intimate Partner Violence Evaluate The Credibility And Utility Of Research Findings. J Fam Viol 36, 259–270 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00163-3
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00163-3