Abstract
A study of professional employees in two large treatment-oriented organizations reveals a contradiction between the avowed objectives of program research and the acceptance of its by those engaged in the program.1 The ideology of science, which favors the interpretation and communication of research results, often conflicts with organizational mores. These mores favor symbolic research-the ritualistic avowal of the worthwhileness of research about agency problems, coupled with objections to its substance-the advancement of knowledge. Even those expressing a high priority for the use of agency funds or staff time to do research were reluctant to interpret or publish research Interpretation readiness was greater for encouraging findings than for discouraging findings. Only a minority expressed an attitude favorable to taking the risks which are believed to exist when information with evaluative implications is widely disseminated. Joseph W. Eaton is professor of social work research and sociology, University of Pittsburgh.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
