Psychosocial intervention programs are ostensibly developed by professionals to address a social problem like drug abuse. A new study conducted by Professor Manuel Eisner from The University of Cambridge Institute of Criminology found that 66 percent of the programs do not reveal a financial conflict of interest by the authors of papers that espouse the use of the programs.
The researchers evaluated 136 different studies that asserted the utility and effectiveness of a variety of psychosocial programs. Seventy-one percent of the papers did not indicate that at least one author benefited financially from the sales of the programs. Sixty-seven percent of the papers listed no conflict of interest. Only 36 percent of the authors revised the statement of no conflict of interest when the conflict of interest was pointed out to them by the researchers.
The researchers did independent testing of the effectiveness of psychosocial intervention programs and found low levels of congruence with the test population in independent studies and the results claimed by the authors that benefited financially. The researchers assert that a conflict of interest in the financial success of a psychosocial program produces an inherent lack of credibility in the program even if it works. This type of program is adopted by governments at the expense of tax payers and the benefits produced do not come close to the benefits claimed in the studies authored by people that benefit from selling the programs. The researchers recommend that a standardized test method conducted by independent bodies is a way to eliminate the ambiguity and potential falsity involved in psychosocial intervention programs used by governments.
