Limitations to Intuition and Practice Wisdom

Add an intro section here.  Why is social work research needed to augment other ways of knowledge in social work practice? Below is a start based on what was already written in the earlier versions of this text:

Despite it’s potential benefits, intuitive thinking and practice wisdom can be prone to a number of errors. We are all limited in terms of what we know and experience. One’s economic, social, and cultural background will shape ones thoughts and beliefs, and acting on these may not work in a different sociocultural context. All humans are prone to limitations in their thinking and reasoning. Below are some specific examples. 

Errors in thinking

We all rely on mental shortcuts to help us figure out what to do in a practice situation. All people, including you and me, must train our minds to be aware of predictable flaws in thinking, termed cognitive biases for example anchoring bias, confirmation bias, false priors to name a few. Here is a link to the Wikipedia entry on cognitive biases, as well as an interactive list. As you can see, there are many types of biases that can result in irrational conclusions.

The most important error in thinking for social scientists to be aware of is confirmation bias. Confirmation bias involves observing and analyzing information in a way that confirms what you already believe to be true. We all arrive at each moment with a set of personal beliefs, experiences, and worldviews that have been developed and ingrained over time. These patterns of thought inform our intuitions, primarily in an unconscious manner. Confirmation bias occurs when our mind ignores or manipulates information to avoid challenging what we already believe to be true. Table 1.1 provides some examples of confirmation bias.

Errors in reasoning

Because the human mind is prone to errors, when anyone makes a statement about what is true or what should be done in a given situation, errors in logic may emerge. Think back to the case studies at the beginning of this section. You most likely had some ideas about what to do in each case, but where did those ideas come from? Below are some of the most common logical fallacies and the ways in which they may negatively influence a social worker. Consider how some of these might apply to your thinking about the practice situations in this chapter.

1. Making hasty generalization: when a person draws conclusions before having enough information. A social worker may apply lessons from a handful of clients to an entire population of people (see Louis Cuff, above). It is important to examine the scientific literature in order to avoid this.
2. Confusing correlation with causation: when one concludes that because two things are correlated (as one changes, the other changes), they must be causally related. As an example, a social worker might observe both an increase in the minimum wage and higher unemployment in certain areas of the city. However, just because two things changed at the same time does not mean they are causally related. Social workers should explore other factors that might impact causality.
3. Going down a slippery slope: when a person concludes that we should not do something because something far worse will happen if we do so. For example, a social worker may seek to increase a client’s opportunity to choose their own activities, but face opposition from those who believe it will lead to clients making unreasonable demands. Clearly, this is nonsense. Changes that foster self-determination are unlikely to result in client revolt. Social workers should be skeptical of arguments opposing small changes because one argues that radical changes are inevitable.
4. Appealing to authority: when a person draws a conclusion by appealing to the authority of an expert or reputable individual, rather than through the strength of the claim. You have likely encountered individuals who believe they are correct because another in a position of authority told them so. Instead, we should work to build a reflective and critical approach to practice that questions authority.
5. Hopping on the bandwagon: when a person draws a conclusion consistent with popular belief. Just because something is popular does not mean it is correct. Fashionable ideas come and go. Social workers should engage with trendy ideas but must ground their work in scientific evidence rather than popular opinion.
6. Using a straw man: when a person does not represent their opponent’s position fairly or with sufficient depth. For example, a social worker advocating for a new group home may depict homeowners that are opposed to clients living in their neighborhood as individuals concerned only with their property values. However, this may not be the case. Social workers should instead engage deeply with all sides of an issue and represent them accurately.