Translating Science to Practice in Corrections: A Revised Model of the 5-Step Inquiry Process of Evidence-Based Practice

In this thesis, I will examine evidence-based practice (EBP) as a primary example of translating science into practice, and as the predominant model of clinical practice within psychology. I argue that despite the merits of EBP and its value for clinical psychology, key conceptual issues arise from the inquiry component of the EBP model. Second, I examine efforts to incorporate scientific models of psychological practice into the correctional domain, and argue that the Risk-Needs-Responsivity model (RNR) has assumed an impoverished, and therefore, problematic version of an evidence-based model of correctional psychological practice. I then describe three key areas of EBP in which adhering to an RNR-based model of practice is particularly detrimental: flexibility, therapeutic alliance, and psychological expertise. To further my critique of attempts to translate science to practice in corrections, I revisit the conceptual issues of the EBP inquiry process and discuss how these manifest within correctional psychology. Finally, I outline a revised formulation of the EBP inquiry process and discuss how this model can overcome current issues in the translation of science to practice in correctional psychology. To further demonstrate the potential strengths of the proposed model, I then apply it to a fictional case exemplar before suggesting some implications for forensic practice. I argue that the revised EBP model provides a more coherent and comprehensive model than the current approaches.