scholarly journals Cambridge Handbook of Routine Dynamics

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
International Research ◽  
Practice Theory ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
Core Concepts ◽  
Related Process

Over the last two decades, Routine Dynamics has emerged as an international research community that shares a particular approach to organizational phenomena. At the heart of this approach is an interest in examining the emergence, reproduction, replication and change of routines as recognizable patterns of actions. In contrast to other research communities interested in those phenomena, Routine Dynamics studies are informed by a distinctive set of theories (especially practice theory and related process-informed theories). This Handbook offers both an accessible introduction to core concepts and approaches in Routine Dynamics as well as a comprehensive and authoritative overview of research in different areas of Routine Dynamics. The chapters of this Handbook are structured around four core themes: 1) Theoretical resources for research on the dynamics of routines, 2) Methodological issues in studying the dynamics routines, 3) Themes in Routine Dynamics research and 4) Relation of Routine Dynamics to other communities of thought.

“I Know Correlation Doesn’t Prove Causation, but . . .”: Are We Jumping to Unfounded Conclusions About the Causes of Sexual Offending?

Sexual Abuse ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L. Nunes ◽  
Chloe I. Pedneault ◽  
W. Eric Filleter ◽  
Sacha Maimone ◽  
Carolyn Blank ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Evidence ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Sexual Offending ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Methodological Rigor ◽  
Research Designs ◽  
Differences Of Opinion ◽  
Information Sensitivity ◽  
Effectiveness And Efficiency

Identifying causes of sexual offending is the foundation of effective and efficient assessment, intervention, and policy aimed at reducing sexual offending. However, studies vary in methodological rigor and the inferences they support, and there are differences of opinion about the conclusions that can be drawn from ambiguous evidence. To explore how researchers in this area interpret the available empirical evidence, we asked authors of articles published in relevant specialized journals to identify (a) an important factor that may lead to sexual offending, (b) a study providing evidence of a relationship between that factor and sexual offending, and (c) the inferences supported by that study. Many participants seemed to endorse causal interpretations and conclusions that went beyond the methodological rigor of the study they identified. Our findings suggest that some researchers may not be adequately considering methodological issues when making inferences about the causes of sexual offending. Although it is difficult to conduct research in this area and all research designs can provide valuable information, sensitivity to the limits methodology places on inferences is important for the sake of accuracy and integrity, and to stimulate more informative research. We propose that increasing attention to methodology in the research community through better training and standards will advance scientific knowledge about the causes of sexual offending, and improve the effectiveness and efficiency of practice and policy.

scholarly journals Let’s do better: public representations of COVID-19 science

FACETS ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 403-423
Author(s):  
Timothy Caulfield ◽  
Tania Bubela ◽  
Jonathan Kimmelman ◽  
Vardit Ravitsky
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Public Trust ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Bad Data

COVID science is being both done and circulated at a furious pace. While it is inspiring to see the research community responding so vigorously to the pandemic crisis, all this activity has also created a churning sea of bad data, conflicting results, and exaggerated headlines. With representations of science becoming increasingly polarized, twisted, and hyped, there is growing concern that the relevant science is being represented to the public in a manner that may cause confusion, inappropriate expectations, and the erosion of public trust. Here we explore some of the key issues associated with the representations of science in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of these issues are not new. But the COVID-19 pandemic has placed a spotlight on the biomedical research process and amplified the adverse ramifications of poor public communication. We need to do better. As such, we conclude with 10 recommendations aimed at key actors involved in the communication of COVID-19 science, including government, funders, universities, publishers, media, and the research communities.

scholarly journals Laser Ranging Workshop draws international research community

Eos ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 84 (6) ◽  
pp. 51 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Noomen ◽  
S. Klosko
Keyword(s):  
International Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Laser Ranging

scholarly journals An international research community

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 341-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerry Stahl ◽  
Nancy Law ◽  
Friedrich Hesse
Keyword(s):  
International Research ◽  
Research Community

scholarly journals Let’s Do Better: Public Representations of COVID-19 Science

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
AISDL
Keyword(s):  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Public Trust ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Bad Data

COVID science is being both done and circulated at a furious pace. While it is inspiring to see the research community responding so vigorously to the pandemic crisis, all this activity has also created a churning sea of bad data, conflicting results, and exaggerated headlines. With representations of science becoming increasingly polarized, twisted and hyped, there is growing concern that the relevant science is being represented to the public in a manner that may cause confusion, inappropriate expectations, and the erosion of public trust. Here we explore some of the key issues associated with the representations of science in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of these issues are not new. But the COVID-19 pandemic has placed a spotlight on the biomedical research process and amplified the adverse ramifications of poor public communication. We need to do better. As such, we conclude with ten recommendations aimed at key actors involved in the communication of COVID-19 science, including government, funders, universities, publishers, media and the research communities.

scholarly journals Collaborating the Support the Research Community, The Next Chapter

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kumsal Bayazit ◽  
Cris Ferguson
Keyword(s):  
Research Community ◽  
Grand Challenges ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
The Future ◽  
Support Research

As a newcomer Kumsal Bayazit will share her observations about the dynamic world of Research including its evolving needs, challenges, and diversity of views on how to progress. She will look forward to the future, exploring the possibilities to support Research communities collaboratively as they work on solving Grand Challenges to advance society.

Using Corpus Linguistics to Analyse how Design Research Frames ‘Design Thinking’

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aysar GHASSAN
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Corpus Linguistics ◽  
Design Research ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Research Communities ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Journal Papers

Academic research communities create knowledge which helps them to claim authority over their investigative domain. The knowledge is not necessary objectively true—often it is skewed to help communities to claim legitimacy. This paper investigates how the design research community frames ‘Design Thinking’, a key concept in design research. Existing literature identifies skewed methods which the community uses when framing Design Thinking. The literature suggests that creating an artificial separation between the ways that designers and scientists think helps the community to claim knowledge on Design Thinking. To further investigate how the community creates knowledge, this paper subjects abstracts from peer-reviewed journal papers which focus on Design Thinking to empirical analysis using Corpus Linguistics methods. The study suggests that use of ‘nominals’ and the creation of ‘meta-knowledge’ helps researchers to claim authority on Design Thinking. These practices appear however to perpetuate an artificial separation between Design Thinking and other design domains.

The economic research potentials of the German Socio-Economic Panel study

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carsten Schröder ◽  
Johannes König ◽  
Alexandra Fedorets ◽  
Jan Goebel ◽  
Markus M. Grabka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Panel Data ◽  
Longitudinal Data ◽  
International Research ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Economic Research ◽  
Data Infrastructure ◽  
Private Households ◽  
Household Panel Data

AbstractWe provide a concise introduction to a household-panel data infrastructure that provides the international research community with longitudinal data of private households in Germany since 1984: the German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). We demonstrate the comparative strength of the SOEP data in answering economically-relevant questions by highlighting its diverse and impactful applications throughout the field.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document