Policy Studies Joumal, Vol. 17, No. 1, Fall, 1988

LITERATURE REVIEW ESSAY

THE UMiTS OF POSiTiViSM:CASE STUDiES OF VALUES iN SCiENCE

Jeny MitchellBaruch College, City University of New York

Emest R. House. 1988. Jesse Jackson and the Politics ci Charisma: TheRise and Fall of the PUSH/Excel Program (Bouider, CO: WestviewPress) 196 pp.; iSBN 0-6133-0767-8.

James M. Rodgers. 1988. The Impact of Policy Analysis (Pittsburgh, PA:University of Pittsburgh Press) 224 pp.; iSBN 0-8229-3571-6.

Sylvia Nobie Tesh. 1988. Hidden Arguments: Political Ideology andDisease Prevention Policy (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers UniversityPress) 215 pp.; ISBN 0-8135-1315-4.

Positivism promises tiiat technicaiiy sophisticated, apditbaiengineers can use vaiue-free criteria and methods to find kJeai sdu-tions to an array of medicai, sociai, and pditicai prdsiems. Despitemuch success arid the commitment of most academbs, positivism fiasbeen increasingly criticized, in particuiar, questbns have been raisedabout the existence d any value-neutral scientists and the reaiity ofthe foct-vaiue dichotomy.

The vdumes reviewed in this essay are noteworthy because theyprovkJe actual cases of positivism's iimitatbns. in Hidden Arguments:Political Ideology and Disease Prevention Policy, Sylvia Ndsle Teshproiies the underiying vaiues of medicai theories and scientifb anaiysesof the Cuban heaith care system, stress among air traffb contrdiers,and exposure to agent orange in Vietnam, in the Impact of PolicyAnalysis, James M. Rodgers uses two income maintenance experimentsto show tfie iimits of positivist methods when there is a high degreeof vaiue conflbt among sfokeiidders. Finaiiy, in Jesse Jackson and thePolitics of Charisma: The Rise and Fall of the PUSH/Excel Program,Emest House reveais tiie proisiems with a technocratic evaiuation ofan inspirationai educatbn program.

216 Policy Studies Joumal

The consistent findings of these works inciude: 1) positivistinquiries refiect certain vaiue premises, 2) the imisact of science isdependent on the values d sfokehdders, and 3) the values of scienceand scientists may infiuence the success and faiiure d pubIb programsand pdicies. These condusions are the subject of this essay.

VALUES AND SQENCE

Of the three works, Tesh's is the i}est at expioring the normativeassumptions of science. Tesh contends that aitemative scientifictheories of disease causaiity hkJe a deisate over wfietfier disease is anindivkJuai or sociai probiem. According to Tesh, the choice d a par-ticuiar scientific modei induces scientists, pdicy makers, and citizensto support partbuiar disease preventbn pdicies.

Tesh identifies four prevaiiing theories of disease causaiity. Germtheory is based on the hypothesis that aii Hinesses are caused by con-tagious microorganisms. Lifestyle theory hdds that disease is causedby an unfieaithy iifestyie, such as smol<ing, poor nutrition, and stress.Environmentai theory contends disease is caused by toxins in the en-vironment, such as asisestos, chemicai fumes, and radioactivity. Lastiy,muitbausai theory maintains disease resuits from a web d intenefotedpersonal and environmentai variabies,

Tesh kJentifies an underiying pditbai meaning for each of thesesupposediy objective medicai theories. For exampie, ix)th germ andiifestyie theories promote the indivkluai as the cause of disease. Eachtfieory allows pdbymakers to ignore "people's compiicated interactionwith their sociai and physicai environments" and justifies the inatten-tion to "sociopditical reaiities such a poverty" (p. 39). The pditbaiimpibation iias been disease prevention pdicies tfiat encourage indivkJ-uai responsibHIty, e.g. wearing a respirator at work, giving up ciga-rettes, or adopting stress reduction technkiues.

Uniike genn and lifestyle theories, Tesh indicates the environ-mental tiieory doesn't hkJe its pditbs. The environmentai theory"pdnts to industriai production as the cause d disease and forces itsproponerrts to tiie condusion tfiat to fiave a iieaithy popuiatbn wemust make cfianges in the economy" (p. 55). Being tiiat tiie pditbaiimpibatbns are obvious, Tesh argues govemment and industry oftenattempt to refute (through germ or iifestyie theories) or diiute theinfiuence of tfie environmentai theory.

One method to weaken tfie environmentai tiieory has t>een toposit the importance of tiie muitbausai theory, Tiie mirttbausai tfieory"makes it easy to direct disease prevention resources to ineffective butsociaiiy nondisruptive programs-instead d to effective but disruptiveones-without pubiic discussion of these options" (p. 63). Since two of

Literature Review Essay 217

three causes of disease are indivkJuai based, the centrai focus ddisease preventbn becomes indivkJuai orientated. Thus, the miritbausaitheory, in consort with germ and iifestyie theories, provides scientistsand pdicymakers a fonnkJabie defense for thwarting efforts to changethe established structures of society.

Tesh darifies how scientific theories endorse certain vaiues bypresenting three case studies, in examining the provisbn of heaithcare in Cuba she finds that medicai support for the iifestyie theory ofdisease has iead the govemment to blame the indivkJuai for disease,even though the communist society is directly responsible for iieaithcare, in anaiyzing pdbies toward agent orange exposure, she findsexp>osed veterans continue to be iiiamed for their diseases (even wfiena toxic chemical is apparently at foutt) because govemment officialswhat to shift responsibility away from society. Finaiiy, in iooking atthe issue of stress during the air traffb contrdiers strike, she findsthe strikers foiied to change wori<ing conditions in the directbn theydesired because they gave scientists (and pdicymakers) the responsibii-ity for diagnosing the meaning of stress on the job.

The upshot of Tesh's anaiysis is that scientifb modeis of causai-ity are vaiue iaden because they pinpdnt some one foct as the primarycause of disease. A science that ado|:Ms one d these causai models isnecessariiy not neutrai. Tesh anaiysis shows positivism is limitedbecause 'science, pditics, and kJedogy interact with one another"(p. 132).

SaENCE, VALUES. AND POLICY STAKEHOLDERS

Rather tfian iooking at tfie vaiues inherent in science, Rodgers'vdume focuses on tiie rde vaiues piay in the productbn and use ofscientific anaiysis. His book begins witii a iook back at tiie inteiiectuathistory of utNizatbn research, moves to a review of various tiieo-retbai modeis and studies d infonnation utiiizatbn, and condudeswith a set of hypotheses for anaiysis.

Rodgers offers twenty-seven hypotheses to expiain the use d(Xiiicy anaiysis. Some d these concem the context d anaiysis, whHeothers emphasize the process d impact. The most interesting set ofhypotheses focus on the importance d value conflbt. Rodgers hypoth-esizes tiiat as vaiue confiict increases, pdicy anaiysis becomes iesstechnbai in its focus, the number and diversity d anaiyses increases,and anaiyses are increasingiy iinked to partisan pdby positbns andinterests,

Rodgers uses the case study metinxJ (interviews and documentanaiysis) to test his hypotfieses. His cases are ai3out the productkmand utiiizatbn of reports i3efore, during, and after the impiementatbn

218 Policy Studies Joumal

of negative income maintenance experiments in Seattie and Denver.These experiments were initiated as tests of an aitemative welferestrategy, as a means to promote the vaiues of aiiocative and technbaiefficiency, and as an effort to move sociai experimentatbn to theforefront of social inquiry.

These experiments represented a unkjue opportunity to study theinteraction of vaiues and science i9ecause of the variety d slake-hdders invdved. The stakeholders induded advocates d a negativeincome tax, academics interested in theoretbai questions and scientificinvestigation, and agencies concemed about ca^Auring a pdby area.The interaction of stakehdder vaiues proved the most interestingaspect d the study,

Rodgers found different skies used the experiment to their ownadvantage. For exampie, economists were iess concerned aix>ut the reaieffects of the project and more interested in discovering signtficanteconomic variabies and advancing their prdessionai careers. Simiiariy,agencies invdved in the experiment were most interested in protectingtheir budgets and defending themselves from their opponents. Rodgersindicates the experiment itseif was more about F>ditics than the searchfor an aiternative strategy of weifore provision.

Simiiariy, Rodgers found the research produced throughout thepdicy process was more pditicai tiian technicai. The high vaiue con-fiict associated with the experiment caused the numiser and diversityof reports to increase so that each stakehdder couid make the iDestuse of the experimentai findings. Thus, anaiyses couid be found thatconfirmed opposing views d the experiments. Rodgers suggests that"receptivity to social science, then, is a belief eiement iike any otherin that it may be confirmed as a resuit of exposure to anaiysis"(p, 132).

Lastly, high vaiue conflict aiso kept a series d technbaiiyoriented anaiyses from bteing produced. Rodgers suggests, "tfiere wassimpiy not enough agreement regarding the ends d pdby to producea series of technicai reports" (p. 118). The experiments (and tiie pdbyanaiysis reports) ended up as more d a pditicai effort to support ap>articuiar pdicy and reduce pditicai oiistacies, tfian as an anaiysis dprogram aiternatives. Thus, Rodgers condudes that vaiue conflict andprior beiief systems are the critbeii foctors influencing the productionand use of pdicy aneUysis.

SCIENCE, VALUES. AND PUBUC POUCY

Of the three works. House's ixx)k is best at examining how theinherent nature of positivist science contributes to the foiiure dpui3ilc programs. His analysis focuses on the implementation and

Literature Review Essay 219

evaiuation d Jesse Jackson's PUSH/Excei education program and thepditics surrounding its demise.

The first part d the ixx>k describes Jesse Jackson and thePUSH/Excel program he founded. House indicates the primary purposeof PUSH/Excei was to motivate minorities and other disadvantagedstudents. The dominant themes d the program were commitment, dis-dpiine, and the assertion of morai authority The visible symbd ofcommitment was the pledge (iike the Piedge d Aiiegiance) by eachperson, student, teacher, parent, to strive for exceiience.

PUSH/Excei was not an educatbnai program with teachingmethods or curriculum materiais. instead, PUSH/Excel was a programof symbds. The program was iabeled a foflure, not because of desegre-gation pditics or ethnb pditics, but i^ecause d a nationai programevaiuatbn.

To receive federai funding, the PUSH/Excei program was sub-jected to a natiomi program evaiuatbn by a private sector researchfirm under contract with the govemment. The approved evaiuatbnmetfioddogy caiied for tiie program to be assessed according to quan-tity d inputs and outputs. House notes the evaiuators employed aconceptuai framework that impiicitiy viewed sociai programs as indus-triai production-as machines, as assemisiy iines, and as pipeiines. Theevaiuators expected the program to be anaiyzatrie and reduciiiie tostandard components that couid be piugged into different settings.However, 'PUSH/Excei with its reiigbus type of fervor and symbdicforms, was nothing iike a machine or an assembly iine with uniformcomponents, as the evaiuators were to discover oniy to iate' (p. 71).Thus, a mismatch grew i)etween the conceptual framework of the evai-uators and the philosophy of PUSH/Excei.

What happened? Based on their conceptuai framewori<, the evaiua-tors dedared iogicaiiy that there was no program to evaiuate. Therewere no technk|ues, curricuium, or other program eiements. From theirperspective, the evaiuators beiieved PUSH/Excei was a foiiure, eventhough they "witnessed with their own eyes mass conversbns andnumerous activities that motivated peopie to action' (p. 75). Housesuggests the reason for the evaiuators' perception of foiiure was theirtraining in sociai science" that dkJ not aiiow them to go beyond theconfines of their conceptuai framework. This probiem was exacerbatedby Jesse Jackson and the PUSH/Excei staff whose "thinking was fartoo removed from the technocratic mentality to comprehend the prob-iem" (p. 75).

Overaii, House's study demonstrates the pditicai impact of posi-tivism on public pdicy. This ixiok shows that positivist science cancontribute to program foHure just as much as interest group activity

220 Policy Studies Joumal

or partisan pditbs. Uke Tesh and Rodgers, House's book finds pditbsand vaiues are fundamentai to supposediy apditbai positivist science.

CONCLUSION

There are two major probiems with these ixx)ks. First, eachvdume tended to divert its focus from the probiem d vaiues inscience. Tesh drifted unnecessartty into an extensive re-examinatbn ofthe "biame the victim" iiterature. Rodgers expended too much space ona cursory review of the utiiizatbn iiterature and the creatbn of acompibated modei d utiiization. House coukl iiave eiiminated some ofthe cfiapters tfiat sougiit to diagnose Jesse Jackson's personaiity andciiarisma.

A second, more important probiem was that each author faiied toprovkJe a descriptbn of principies for the conduct d inquiries tfiatintegrate facts arid vaiues. Tesh oniy hopes scientists wHi 'incorporateegaiitarian vaiues in the search for truth" (p. 177). Rodgers advocatesmore empiricai research to "examine the production of pdby anaiysisand test the hypotfieses relating vaiue conflbt and interests served toproductbn" (p. 155). House doesn't offer any aitemative evaiuatbnmethoddogy except, by exampie, his own book's methoddogy.

Despite the absence of sdutions, these books make a signifbantcontribution to our understanding of positivist science and its iimita-tions. They compiement recent ixxiks and articies that offer theoriesof how facts and vaiues are interreiated. They aiso higiiligiit some dthe practicai obstades for bringing vaiues into the process. Overaii,the findings of these three vdumes shoukJ provide another justiflca-tion for the deveiopment of a post-positivist science tfiat integratesnormative and empiricai analyses.