Given that professionals’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice is a key to implementing evidence-based practice, considerable attention has been devoted to understanding social workers’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice, with interventions to change those attitudes and thereby promote the adoption of evidence-based practice. In the Chinese context, however, neither systematic studies nor interventions have been conducted, in part because of the lack of valid scales to measure such attitudes among Chinese social workers. This study examined the reliability and validity of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale, using data collected from 181 registered social workers in Hong Kong.
Findings
Confirmative factor analysis found that Chinese social workers’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice can be captured by four distinct constructs: (1) intuitive Appeal of evidence-based practice, (2) likelihood of adopting evidence-based practice given Requirements to, (3) Openness to change, and (4) Divergence of usual practice with research-based interventions. Reliability coefficients showed that the subscales and overall scale have good internal consistency reliability. With the demonstrated validity and reliability, scores on the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale indicated that Hong Kong social workers have less positive attitudes towards evidence-based practice, compared to their Western counterparts.
Applications
This study provides evidence about the potential usefulness of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale for research and practice in the Chinese context. The Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale can be used for studies to uncover remediable barriers to the adoption of evidence-based practice, which may inform the development of tailored evidence-based practice implementation and dissemination strategies in the Chinese context.
AaronsG. A. (2004).
Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: The Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS).Mental Health Services Research,
6, 61–74. doi:10.1023/B:MHSR.0000024351.12294.65
2.
AaronsG. A. (2005).
Measuring provider attitudes toward evidence-based practice: Consideration of organizational context and individual differences.Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America,
14, 255–271. doi:10.1016/j.chc.2004.04.008
3.
AaronsG. A.CafriG.LugoL.SawitzkyA. (2012).
Expanding the domains of attitudes towards evidence-based practice: The evidence based practice attitude scale-50.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research,
39, 331–340. doi:10.1007/s10488-010-0302-3
4.
AaronsG. A.GlissonC.HoagwoodK.KelleherK.LandsverkJ.CafriG. (2010).
Psychometric properties and U.S. national norms of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS).Psychological Assessment,
22, 356–365. doi:10.1037/a0019188
5.
AaronsG. A.McDonaldE. J.SheehanA. K.Walrath-GreeneC. M. (2007).
Confirmatory factor analysis of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) in a geographically diverse sample of community mental health providers.Administration and Policy in Mental Health,
34, 465–469. doi:10.1007/s10488– 007–0127-x
6.
AaronsG. A.SawitzkyA. C. (2006).
Organizational culture and climate and mental health provider attitudes toward evidence-based practice.Psychological Services,
3, 61–72. doi:10.1037/1541-1559.3.1.61
7.
AjzenI. (1991).
The theory of planned behavior.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
50, 179–211. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
8.
BarthR. P.LeeB. R.LindseyM. A.CollinsK. S.StriederF.ChorpitaB. F.SparksJ. A. (2012).
Evidence-based practice at a crossroads: The timely emergence of common elements and common factors.Research on Social Work Practice,
22, 108–119. doi:10.1177/1049731511408440
9.
BellamyJ. L.BledsoeS. E.TraubeD. E. (2006).
The current state of evidence-based practice in social work: A review of the literature and qualitative analysis of expert interviews.Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work,
3(1), 23–48. doi:10.1300/J394v03n01_02
10.
BrownT. A. (2015). Methodology in the Social Sciences. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.).
New York, NY:
The Guilford Press.
11.
ChangJ.GuanZ.ChiI.YangK. H.BaiZ. G. (2014).
Evidence-based practice in the health and social services in China: Developments, strategies, and challenges.International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare,
12, 17–24. doi:10.1097/01.XEB.0000444660.59606.d2
12.
ChauJ. P. C.LopezV.ThompsonD. R. (2008).
A survey of Hong Kong nurses’ perceptions of barriers to and facilitators of research utilization.Research in Nursing & Health,
31, 640–649. doi:10.1002/nur.20289
13.
ChoE.KimS. (2015).
Cronbach’s coefficient alpha: Well-known but poorly understood.Organizational Research Methods,
18, 207–230. doi:10.1177/1094428114555994
14.
DaviesH. T. O.NutleyS. M.SmithP. C. (Eds). (2000). What works?: Evidence-based policy and practice in public services.
Bristol, UK:
The Policy Press.
15.
DriskoJ.GradyM. (2015).
Evidence-based practice in social work: A contemporary perspective.Clinical Social Work Journal,
43, 274–282. doi:10.1007/s10615-015-0548-z
16.
EgelandK. M.RuudT.OgdenT.Lindstr⊘mJ. C.HeiervangK. S. (2016).
Psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS): To measure implementation readiness.Health Research Policy and Systems,
14, 47. doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0114-3
17.
GambrillE. (2011).
Evidence-based practice and the ethics of discretion.Journal of Social Work,
11, 26–48. doi:10.1177/1468017310381306
18.
GarciaA. R.KimM.PalinkasL. A.SnowdenL.LandsverkJ. (2016).
Socio-contextual determinants of research evidence use in public-youth systems of care.Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research,
43, 569–578. doi:10.1007/s10488-015-0640-2
19.
GibbsL.GambrillE. (2002).
Evidence-based practice: Counterarguments to objections.Research on Social Work Practice,
12, 452–476. doi:10.1177/1049731502012003007
20.
GlissonC. (2007).
Assessing and changing organizational culture and climate for effective services.Research on Social Work Practice,
17, 736–747. doi:10.1177/1049731507301659
21.
GlissonC.JamesL. R. (2002).
The cross‐level effects of culture and climate in human service teams.Journal of Organizational Behavior,
23, 767–794. doi:10.1002/job.162
22.
GrayM.JoyE.PlathD.WebbS. A. (2013).
Implementing evidence-based practice: A review of the empirical research literature. Research on Social Work Practice,
23, 157–166. doi:10.1177/1049731512467072
23.
GrayM.JoyE.PlathD.WebbS. (2014).
Opinions about evidence: A study of social workers’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice.Journal of Social Work,
14, 23–40. doi:10.1177/1468017313475555
24.
GrayM.McDonaldC. (2006).
Pursuing good practice? The limits of evidence-based practice.Journal of Social Work,
6, 7–20. doi:10.1177/1468017306062209
25.
HemmelgarnA. L.GlissonC.JamesL. R. (2006).
Organizational culture and climate: Implications for services and interventions research.Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice,
13, 73–89. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00008.x
HorwitzS. M.HurlburtM. S.Goldhaber-FiebertJ. D.PalinkasL. A.Rolls-ReutzJ.ZhangJ.LandsverkJ. (2014).
Exploration and adoption of evidence-based practice by US child welfare agencies.Children and Youth Services Review,
39, 147–152. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.10.004
28.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1998).
Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification.Psychological Methods,
3, 424–453. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
29.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999).
Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,
6, 1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
30.
KeyserD.HarringtonD.AhnH. (2016).
A confirmatory factor analysis of the evidence-based practice attitudes scale in child welfare.Children and Youth Services Review,
69, 158–165. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.08.005
31.
KlineR. B. (2016). Methodology in the social sciences. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.).
New York, NY:
The Guilford Press.
32.
LamC. W.BlythE. (2014).
Re-engagement and negotiation in a changing political and economic context: Social work in Hong Kong.British Journal of Social Work,
44, 44–62. doi:10.1093/bjsw/bcs092
33.
LeungJ. C. B. (2007).
An international definition of social work for China.International Journal of Social Welfare,
16, 391–397. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2397.2007.00495.x
34.
MacgowanM. J.VakhariaS. P. (2016). Evidence-based practice: Challenges and opportunities in the global context. In PalattiyilG, SidhvaDChakrabartiM. (Eds), Social work in a global context: Issues and challenges (pp. 69–86).
New York, NY:
Routledge.
35.
MelasC. D.ZampetakisL. A.DimopoulouA.MoustakisV. (2012).
Evaluating the properties of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) in health care.Psychological Assessment,
24, 867–876. doi:10.1037/a0027445
36.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.).
New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
37.
PalinkasL. A.GarciaA. R.AaronsG. A.Finno-VelasquezM.HollowayI. W.MackieT. I.ChamberlainP. (2016).
Measuring use of research evidence: The Structured Interview for Evidence Use.Research on Social Work Practice,
26, 550–564. doi:10.1177/1049731514560413
38.
PattersonD. A.Berk-ClarkC.WilliamsS.-L.DulmusC. N. (2017).
Are therapists likely to use a new empirically supported treatment if required?Journal of Social Work. doi:10.1177/1468017317743138.
39.
PattersonD. A.DulmusC. N.MaguinE.FavaN. (2014).
Refining the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale: An alternative confirmatory factor analysis.Social work Research,
38, 47–58. doi:10.1093/swr/svu006
40.
PowellB. J.McMillenJ. C.ProctorE. K.CarpenterC. R.GriffeyR. T.BungerA. C.YorkJ. L. (2012).
A compilation of strategies for implementing clinical innovations in health and mental health.Medical Care Research and Review,
69, 123–157. doi:10.1177/1077558711430690
41.
ProctorE. K.RosenA. (2008).
From knowledge production to implementation: Research challenges and imperatives.Research on Social Work Practice,
18, 285–291. doi:10.1177/1049731507302263
42.
RaykovT. (1997).
Scale reliability, Cronbach’s coefficient alpha, and violations of essential tau-equivalence with fixed congeneric components.Multivariate Behavioral Research,
32, 329–353. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr3204_2
43.
RaykovT. (2001).
Bias of coefficient α for fixed congeneric measures with correlated errors.Applied Psychological Measurement,
25, 69–76. doi:10.1177/01466216010251005
44.
RubinA. (2008). Practitioner’s guide to using research for evidence-based practice.
Hoboken, NJ:
John Wiley & Sons.
45.
RubinA. (2015).
Efforts to bridge the gap between research and practice in social work: Precedents and prospects: Keynote address at the bridging the gap symposium.Research on Social Work Practice,
25, 408–414. doi:10.1177/1049731514535852
46.
RubinA.ParrishD. (2007).
Views of evidence-based practice among faculty in Master of Social Work programs: A national survey.Research on Social Work Practice,
17, 110–122. doi:10.1177/1049731506293059
47.
SackettD. L.StrausS. E.RichardsonW. S.RosenbergW.HaynesR. B. (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (2nd ed.).
Edinburgh, UK:
Churchill Livingstone.
48.
ShekD. T. L.LamM. C.TsoiK. W. (2004). Evidence-based practice in Hong Kong. In ThyerB. A.KaziM. A. F. (Eds), International perspectives on evidence based practice in social work (pp. 167–180).
Birmingham, UK:
Venture.
49.
ThyerB.MyersL. (2011).
The quest for evidence-based practice: A view from the United States.Journal of Social Work,
11, 8–25. doi:10.1177/1468017310381812
50.
UptonD.UptonP. (2006).
Development of an evidence-based practice questionnaire for nurses.Journal of Advanced Nursing,
53(4), 454–458. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2006.03739.x
51.
van SonsbeekM. A. M. S.HutschemaekersG. J. M.VeermanJ. W.KleinjanM.AaronsG. A.TiemensB. G. (2015).
Psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS).Health Research Policy and Systems,
13, 69. doi:10.1186/s12961-015-0058-z
52.
WebbS. A. (2001).
Some considerations on the validity of evidence-based practice in social work.British Journal of Social Work,
31, 57–79. doi:10.1093/bjsw/31.1.57
53.
WikeT. L.BledsoeS. E.ManuelJ. I.DespardM.JohnsonL. V.BellamyJ.L.Killian-FarrellC. (2014).
Evidence-based practice in social work: Challenges and opportunities for clinicians and organizations.Clinical Social Work Journal,
42, 161–170. doi:10.1007/s10615-014-0492-3
