{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.016093635698610095, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.362790697674418, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Evidence and Effectiveness in Music Therapy

Adopting a knowledge-based controversy perspective, this article considers critically the ‘fit’ or appropriateness of the so-called ‘gold standard’ of assessment – the Randomised Controlled Trial. It sets the growing dominance of this method within music therapy in the contexts of medical work and the changing social relations of medical expertise, the importance of local practice in music therapy (and healthcare more widely), and the politics of representation as they apply to medical modes of accounting and measurement. I then consider what is overlooked when experimental models are used as the prime mode of perceiving the music therapeutic process and suggest that they may not provide a good or appropriate way of observing, accounting for and assessing music therapy. I suggest that they are not amenable to the observation and documentation of temporal and local craft practices and that these practices provide the active ingredients of music therapy's effectiveness. I conclude that music therapy is poised to highlight the radical performative and social features of health status and that these features have far-reaching implications for our concepts of illness and the aetiology of illness and, most importantly, for the ways in which we conceptualise and implement therapeutic procedures of all kinds.