Testing nonlocal realism with entangled coherent states

We investigate the violation of nonlocal realism using entangled coherent states (ECSs) under nonlinear operations and homodyne measurements. We address recently proposed Leggett-type inequalities, including a class of optimized incompatibility inequalities proposed by Branciard et al. [Nature Phys. 4, 681 (2008)], and thoroughly assess the effects of detection inefficiency.

Prising open the black box: Critical realism, action research and social work

There is a growing interest in critical realism and its application to social work. This article makes a case for adopting this philosophical position in qualitative social work research. More specifically, it suggests that there is a concordance between critical realist premises and action research with its cyclical inquiry and advancement of social change. This combination of philosophy and method, it is argued, promotes anti-oppressive social work research and illuminates the processes shaping outcomes in programme evaluations. Overall, the article underscores the importance of 'depth' in qualitative inquiry by conceiving the social world in terms of five interlacing, social domains.

Faithful test of nonlocal realism with entangled coherent states

We investigate the violation of Leggett's inequality for nonlocal realism using entangled coherent states and various types of local measurements. We prove mathematically the relation between the violation of the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt form of Bell's inequality and Leggett's one when tested by the same resources. For Leggett inequalities, we generalize the nonlocal realistic bound to systems in Hilbert spaces larger than bidimensional ones and introduce an optimization technique that allows one to achieve larger degrees of violation by adjusting the local measurement settings. Our work describes the steps that should be performed to produce a self-consistent generalization of Leggett's original arguments to continuous-variable states.

Keeping it real! Enhancing realism in standardised patient OSCE stations

Background: Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs) are a
commonly used method of assessing clinical competency in healthcare education. They can providean opportunity to observe candidates interacting with patients.
There are many challenges in using real patients in OSCEs, and increasingly standardised patients are being used as a preference. However, by using standardised patients there is a risk of making the encounter arti?cial and removed from actual clinical practice.
Context: Efforts made in terms of cognitive, auditory, visual, tactile, psychological and emotional cues can minimise the differences between a simulated
and real clinical scenario. However, a number of factors, including feasibility, cost and usability, need to be considered if such techniques are to be practicable
within an OSCE framework.
Innovation: This article describes a series of techniques that have been used in our institution to enhance the realism of a standardised patient encounter in an
OSCE. Efforts in preparing standardised patient roles, and how they portray these roles, will be considered. A wide variety of equipment can also be used in
combination with a patient and the surrounding environment, which can further enhance the authenticity of the simulated scenario.
Implications: By enhancing the realism in simulated patient OSCE encounters, there is potential to trigger more authentic conscious responses from candidates and implicit reactions that the candidates themselves may be less
aware of. Furthermore, using such techniques may allow faculty members to select scenarios that were previously not thought possible in an OSCE

The uncritical realism of realist evaluation

This article is a response to Ray Pawson’s critique of critical realism, the philosophy of science elaborated by Roy Bhaskar. I argue with Pawson’s interpretation of critical realism’s positions on both natural and social science and his charges concerning its totalizing ontology, its arrogant epistemology and its naive methodology. The differences between critical realism and realist evaluation are not as significant as Pawson contends. The main differences between the two realisms lie in their approaches to the relationship between social structures and human agency, and between facts and values. I argue that evaluation scientists need to clearly distinguish structure and agency. They should also make their values explicit. The uncritical approach of realist evaluation, combined with its underplaying of the importance of agency, leaves it open to implication in the abuses of bureaucratic instrumentalism.