Abstract
The manifest purpose of professional journals is to share important knowledge. Increasing revelations of flaws in the peer-reviewed literature shows that this purpose is often not honored and that inflated claims of knowledge as well as other concerns such as misrepresentations of disliked or misunderstood views are rife. In this article, avoidable misunderstandings of science and evidence-based practice (EBP) in publications in the British Journal of Social Work 2005–2016 are described as well as strategies used to forward misinformation. Such discourse misinforms rather than informs readers and decreases opportunities to accurately inform social workers about possibilities to help clients and to avoid harming them and to involve clients as informed participants. Those writing about avoidable ignorance highlight how it is used strategically, perhaps to neutralize what is viewed as dangerous knowledge—the process of EBP and science generally, which may threaten the status quo.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
