Values, practices, and the utilization of empirical critiques in the clinical triad

Empirical science is composed of a set of mutually reinforcing values and practices. A potential difficulty arises when empirical knowledge products are disseminated to other groups with an interest in research findings. The danger is that researchers' valuer and practices will be deemed superior to those of other parties, and codified across different contexts without consideration of their effectiveness in achieving broader goals of science (e.g., sharing important knowledge about treating problems in living). Alternatively, understanding and respecting how the values and practices of different groups are situated in local decision-making contexts can open up creative ways for enhancing collaboration between different members of the research and clinical practice community. Taking Scheel's (this issue) thorough and well-crafted critique of research on dialectical behavior therapy as an example, we explore the way values, practices, and local decision-making contexts affect researchers', practitioners', and clinical administrators' reactions to empirical knowledge products.