Mental models, communication, and engagement in marine projects

2017 ◽  
Vol 74 (7) ◽  
pp. 2034-2039 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabio Boschetti ◽  
Matthew Andreotta
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Engagement Process ◽  
Causal Layered Analysis ◽  
Common Framework ◽  
Complex Decision Making

Abstract In a hypothetical decision-making situation in which a unique truth exists and each party’s aim in acquiring knowledge is to approach the truth, argumentation would be unnecessary because the best scientific theory would win the argument. Likewise, if truth is irrelevant and a perfect persuasion method is available, argumentation would also be pointless, because arguing parties, each possessing the perfect recipe, would lead a third party to switch sides endlessly. In the real world, argumentation matters because a unique truth rarely exists, information can be uncertain or vague, aims are often ambiguous if not contradictory, and acquiring knowledge can have other purposes besides approaching the truth. Marine scientists are increasingly expected to contribute to complex decision-making by providing not only scientific evidence, but also impact in the form of effective communication and persuasion. Here we review insights from different disciplines on how humans organise knowledge, beliefs, opinions, assumptions and worldviews, how these interrelate and how they affect decision-making as well as the reception of information. By focussing on the theory of mental models and the Causal Layered Analysis we also show how the structure underlying the organisation of scientific and non-scientific knowledge can be reduced to a fairly common framework. We conclude by reviewing some tools a marine scientist can employ in a stakeholder engagement process in order to better understand the audience to which scientific information needs to be delivered.

Farmacogenetische tests in de Belgische zorg: (hoe) beginnen we eraan?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. DE PAUW ◽  
W. MARTINET ◽  
D. THEUNS ◽  
K. VANDEVEN ◽  
H. DE LOOF
Keyword(s):  
Drug Interactions ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Implementation Process ◽  
Local Context ◽  
Pharmacogenetic Testing ◽  
Average Patient ◽  
Current List ◽  
A Current

Pharmacogenetic tests in Belgian care: (how) do we get started? Personalized medicine attempts to take all the information about an individual into account, and this also includes characteristics that differ from the presumed ‘average patient’. This approach includes pharmacogenetics, where the influence of genetic variation in various biomolecules on drug response is studied. By performing preemptive pharmacogenetic testing, drug therapies can be optimized, and serious side effects can be avoided. In order to implement pharmacogenetic testing in practice, some hurdles still need to be overcome. For example, scientific information needs to be translated into practical clinical guidelines that are applicable in the local context and reimbursement issues also need to be resolved. In this paper, a current list of gene-drug interactions is presented that could be prioritized during the implementation process in Belgium. The list only contains clinically relevant interactions for which there is sufficient scientific evidence. In addition, a tool is described that takes into account the drug consumption in a specific healthcare environment, to prioritize the most interesting gene-drug interactions. International implementation initiatives show that the obstacles are surmountable. It is therefore time to start a dialogue on accelerating the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in Belgium. We hope that this prioritized list, together with a discussion of some hurdles that need to be overcome, can inform this debate.

scholarly journals Integration of AHP and GTMA to Make a Reliable Decision in Complex Decision-Making Problems: Application of the Logistics Provider Selection Problem as a Case Study

Symmetry ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 766
Author(s):  
Danijela Tuljak-Suban ◽  
Patricija Bajec
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Analytic Network Process ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Selection Problem ◽  
New Method ◽  
Analytic Hierarchy ◽  
Decision Making Problem ◽  
Network Process ◽  
Complex Decision Making ◽  
Complex Decision

When solving a Multi-Criteria Decision-Making problem of any degree of complexity, many researchers rely on the analytic hierarchy process (AHP). To consider mutual connections between criteria and clusters at the same level and not only the hierarchical structure between criteria and subcriteria, researchers often upgrade from AHP to the Analytic Network Process (ANP), which also examines the interdependency of criteria. However, the ANP method requires a large number of pairwise comparisons. In the case of a complex decision-making problem, the authors of this paper suggest upgrading the AHP method with the graph theory and matrix approach (GTMA) for several reasons: (1) The new method is based on digraphs and permanent value computation, which does not require a hypothesis about interdependency; (2) in case of similar alternatives, the distinguishable coefficient of the new method is higher than those computed for AHP and ANP; (3) the new method allows decision makers to rank comparable alternatives and to combine structurally similar methods without increasing the number of comparisons and the understanding of the results. The developed method (AH-GTMA) is validated by a numerical example of a complex decision-making problem based on a symmetrical set of similar alternatives, a third party logistic provider (3PLP) selection problem.

Some reasons why evidence from educational research is not particularly popular among (pre-service) teachers: A discussion

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 209-214
Author(s):  
Frank Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Teacher Education ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Educational Research ◽  
Information Sources ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Individual

Abstract. This discussion first highlights novel aspects that the individual articles contribute to the special issue on (future) teachers' choice, use, and evaluation of (non-)scientific information sources about educational topics. Among these highlights are the conceptualizations of epistemic goals and the type of pedagogical task as moderators of the selection and use of scientific evidence. The second part raises overarching questions, including the following: How inclusive do we want the concept of evidence to be? How should teachers use research evidence in their pedagogical problem-solving and decision-making? To what extent is multidisciplinary teacher education contributing to epistemological confusion, possibly leading to (pre-service) teachers' low appreciation of educational research?

scholarly journals Navigating Mental Models of Risk and Uncertainty within the Ocean Forecast System: An Oregon Case Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 431-447
Author(s):  
Jessica Kuonen ◽  
Flaxen Conway ◽  
Ted Strub
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Information Seeking ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
End Users ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Commercial Fishing ◽  
End User ◽  
Data Provider

Abstract This case study explores how to add value to regional ocean condition forecast information by bringing awareness to the processes that govern decision-making and outcomes within the system. A modified mental models research approach is applied to examine differences and similarities in perceptions of risk and comfort with uncertainty between two interdependent communities, the ocean “data provider” and “end user,” and how these perceptions impact accessibility and usefulness of data products. In this study, data providers are academic and agency scientists from institutions that provide ocean condition forecasts to public end users (n = 17). End users are members of the Oregon commercial-fishing community (n = 16). Comparisons reveal key differences and similarities related to the nature of each profession that impact perceptions of scale in time and space and reveal the ways that cumulative and intersecting risks and uncertainties act as key drivers in decision-making. Implications for expanding the current understanding of how ocean forecasts are produced and used include 1) highlighting the value of optimizing ocean forecast delivery tools based on end-user needs and information-seeking processes already in place, 2) identifying structural and cultural barriers within the data-provider network that prevent them from doing so, and 3) demonstrating the value of learning about both producers and users of scientific information and suggesting potential ways to structure cooperation and strengthen relationships between them by working toward a common desired outcome.

scholarly journals Public Participation for Integrated Groundwater Management: The Case of Maneadero Valley, Baja California, Mexico

Water ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (17) ◽  
pp. 2326
Author(s):  
Mariana Villada-Canela ◽  
Dalia Marcela Muñoz-Pizza ◽  
Vanesa García-Searcy ◽  
Raquel Camacho-López ◽  
Luis Walter Daesslé ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Groundwater Management ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Limited Participation ◽  
Aquifer Management ◽  
Participation Mechanisms ◽  
Barriers And Challenges ◽  
Different Levels

There is a controversy in groundwater management: some people argue that public participation has decreased efficiency in decision-making, while others believe this process is not executed effectively. Questions about whether public participation results from the context involving influential people, the rules, or the way participation mechanisms were designed need examination. In this study, opportunities, barriers, and challenges of public participation were analyzed in the management of a coastal aquifer affected by marine intrusion in the Maneadero Valley, México. Mixed methods were implemented, involving 28 interviews with key actors and 50 surveys conducted during 2014 and 2017 with groundwater users. Results show that public participation is mainly determined by power differences, lack of continuity in the participatory processes, and the design of the participation mechanisms. State actors have greater decision-making power in integrated groundwater management. In contrast, groundwater users have limited participation in the process of making proposals, and their participation is generally passive. There are limitations to broad, informed, and responsible public participation: examples of these limitations include different levels of information, inappropriate institutional arrangements, failure to disseminate scientific information, lack of spaces to exercise public participation, and absence of political will. Hence, to improve Maneadero aquifer management, it is necessary to decentralize decision-making, integrate technical and non-technical knowledge, generate scientific evidence about water availability, and give a prominent role to stakeholders and users from the initial stages. In addition, internalization and water culture are required. These results can help to guide integrated groundwater management in other arid regions.

Aligning Expectation and Reality: A Summary of Dispersant Risk Communication Issues

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 585-590 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra K. Scholz ◽  
Ann Hayward Walker ◽  
Janet H. Kucklick ◽  
Robert G. Pond
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Communication ◽  
Science Studies ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
New Approach ◽  
The Public ◽  
Common Framework ◽  
Solid Foundation ◽  
Good Risk

ABSTRACT The potential and perceived environmental risks associated with dispersant use have been addressed by many scientific studies costing millions of dollars and tens of thousands of research hours. Nevertheless, decision makers still have many diverse and contradictory viewpoints, which can impede their ability to evaluate and reach consensus on the actual risks associated with this countermeasure. In an attempt to resolve the problem in a different way, a new approach was formulated, based on the following hypothesis: The inability to create a solid foundation for dispersant decision support is based not only on limitations to scientific information, but also on the wide differences in the way people understand and interpret this information. In other words, a critical aspect of improved decision making for dispersants is related to good risk communication, not more natural science studies. In 1994, industry initiated a research project to test this hypothesis and define the critical risk communication factors for dispersant decision making. This paper presents a summary of the identified dispersant risk communication issues. Building upon previous papers which described the project methodology and analytical results, this paper presents the risk communication messages which need to be shared with decision makers and the public. This information promotes a technically sound, clear, and common framework for evaluating the ecological risks associated with dispersant use in marine waters.

scholarly journals Keeping science’s seat at the decision-making table: Mechanisms to motivate policy-makers to keep using scientific information in the age of disinformation

FACETS ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1045-1064 ◽  
Author(s):  
Justin N. Marleau ◽  
Kimberly D. Girling
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Multiple Streams ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Policy Interventions ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
The Uk

Policy-makers are confronted with complex problems that require evaluating multiple streams of evidence and weighing competing interests to develop and implement solutions. However, the policy interventions available to resolve these problems have different levels of supporting scientific evidence. Decision-makers, who are not necessarily scientifically trained, may favour policies with limited scientific backing to obtain public support. We illustrate these tensions with two case studies where the scientific consensus went up against the governing parties’ chosen policy. What mechanisms exist to keep the weight of scientific evidence at the forefront of decision-making at the highest levels of government? In this paper, we propose that Canada create “Departmental Chief Science Advisors” (DCSAs), based on a program in the UK, to help complement and extend the reach of the newly created Chief Science Advisor position. DCSAs would provide advice to ministers and senior civil servants, critically evaluate scientific work in their host department, and provide public outreach for the department’s science. We show how the DCSAs could be integrated into their departments and illustrate their potential benefits to the policy making process and the scientific community.

scholarly journals Benefits and Limitations of Using Decision-Analytic Tools to Assess Uncertainty and Prioritize Landscape Conservation Cooperative Information Needs

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 280-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max Post van der Burg ◽  
Catherine Cullinane Thomas ◽  
Tracy Holcombe ◽  
Richard D. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Information Needs ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Landscape Conservation ◽  
Decision Context ◽  
Effective Delivery ◽  
The Right ◽  
Funding Research

Abstract The Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs) are a network of partnerships throughout North America that are tasked with integrating science and management to support more effective delivery of conservation at a landscape scale. To achieve this integration, some LCCs have adopted the approach of providing their partners with better scientific information in an effort to facilitate more efficient and coordinated conservation decisions. Taking this approach has led many LCCs to begin funding research to provide the information for improved decision making. To ensure that funding goes to research projects with the highest likelihood of leading to more integrated broad-scale conservation, some LCCs have also developed approaches for prioritizing which information needs will be of most benefit to their partnerships. We describe two case studies in which decision-analytic tools were used to quantitatively assess the relative importance of information for decisions made by partners in the Plains and Prairie Potholes LCC. The results of the case studies point toward a few valuable lessons in terms of using these tools with LCCs. Decision-analytic tools tend to help shift focus away from research-oriented discussions and toward discussions about how information is used in making better decisions. However, many technical experts do not have enough knowledge about decision-making contexts to fully inform the latter type of discussion. When assessed in the right decision context, however, decision analyses can point out where uncertainties actually affect optimal decisions and where they do not. This helps technical experts understand that not all research is valuable in improving decision making. Perhaps most important, our results suggest that decision-analytic tools may be more useful for LCCs as a way of developing integrated objectives for coordinating partner decisions across the landscape, rather than simply ranking research priorities.

scholarly journals Information-seeking behaviors and barriers to the incorporation of scientific evidence into clinical practice: A survey with Brazilian dentists

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. e0249260
Author(s):  
Branca Heloisa Oliveira ◽  
Izabel Monteiro D. Hyppolito ◽  
Zilson Malheiros ◽  
Bernal Stewart ◽  
Claudio Mendes Pannuti
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Training ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Dental Students ◽  
Southeastern Brazil ◽  
Bibliographic Databases

The aim of this online cross-sectional study is to identify the sources of scientific information used by Brazilian dentists in clinical decision-making and the barriers that they perceive as important to the incorporation of scientific evidence into clinical practice. A pretested questionnaire created in Google Forms which was made available to participants through links sent by e-mail or shared on Facebook® and Instagram® was used to collect the data between October 2018 and May 2019. Only dentists who were involved in direct or indirect care of patients (i.e. clinicians who performed dental procedures or dental educators who participated in the clinical training of graduate or postgraduate dental students) were asked to complete the questionnaire. The sample was comprised of 528 dentists (the response rate from the alumni database was 6.9%); their mean age was 45.2 years (±12.5) and 30.9% had an academic position. The majority were women (68.0%) and lived in Southern or Southeastern Brazil (96.0%). The sources of scientific information more frequently used by them in clinical decision-making were clinical guidelines (65.1%; 95% CI: 60.9, 69.2), scientific articles (56.8%; 95%CI: 52.5, 61.1) and bibliographic databases (48.3%; 95% CI: 43.9, 52.6). The information resource less frequently used was social media. The most important barriers to the clinical use of scientific evidence were: difficulty in determining whether scientific contents found on the Internet were reliable or not (41.8%; 95% CI: 37.6, 46.2), high cost of access to scientific papers (37.7%; 95% CI: 33.5, 41.9), and lack of time for reading scientific articles (32.4%; 95% CI: 28.4, 36.6). Although Brazilian dentists show a positive attitude towards obtaining scientific evidence from reliable sources, there still remain important barriers to the translation of evidence into practice. This can have significant implications for quality of care and should be further investigated.

scholarly journals Reflections on science advisory systems in Canada

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Remi Quirion ◽  
Arthur Carty ◽  
Paul Dufour ◽  
Ramia Jabr
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Scientific Development ◽  
Recent Experience ◽  
Science Advisory ◽  
Science Advice ◽  
Complex Decision Making ◽  
Solid Foundation ◽  
Advisory Systems ◽  
The Impact

Abstract As the evolution of our world has triggered complexity and technological sophistication, it is now essential to consider sound scientific evidence as an integral element of decision-making. Science advisers or chief scientists have to take into account many factors in giving advice. Depending on the nature and level of advice, factors such as the ideology of the governing body, the state of the social, economic and scientific development in the country or region, potential impacts on the health, environment and security of the community, the balance of risk and reward in various options, must all be considered. Canada has lived through a few of these issues in its recent experience with science advice and advisory systems. This article will elaborate on the impact and influence of changes in science advisory bodies at the federal and Quebec government levels and will provide a perspective on their impact. It examines the historical evolution of the advisory apparatus for science throughout Canada’s history and underscores some of their successes and failures under different regimes. The conclusion drawn in this article is that science and science advisory systems in Canada have lacked continuity and a solid foundation thus weakening efforts to enable sound science-based policy into decision-making. The article argues for a more institutionalized and pluralistic approach to ensuring that evidence and science advice can endure—both at the federal and provincial levels. In many ways, the experience with these advisory mechanisms suggests a growing need to ensure sound advice within increasingly complex decision-making as well as a demand by citizens to have scientific evidence considered more carefully in public policy and for the public interest. This article is published as part of a collection on scientific advice to governments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document