scholarly journals The human side of geoscientists: comparing geoscientists' and non-geoscientists' cognitive and affective responses to geology

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthea Lacchia ◽  
Geertje Schuitema ◽  
Fergus McAuliffe
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Economic Impacts ◽  
Affective Responses ◽  
Cognitive Responses ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Human Interactions ◽  
Perceived Impact ◽  
Affective Components ◽  
Human Side

Abstract. Geoscientists and non-geoscientists often struggle to communicate with each other. In this paper we aim to understand how geoscientists and non-geoscientists perceive geological concepts and activities, that is, how they think (cognitive responses) and feel (affective responses) about them. To this effect, using a mixed-methods approach, we compare mental models – people's representation of a phenomenon – of the subsurface, mining/quarrying, and drilling, between geoscientists (n=24) and non-geoscientists (n=38) recruited in Ireland. We identify four dominant themes which underlie their mental models: (1) degree of knowledge and familiarity, (2) presence of humans, (3) affective beliefs, and (4) beliefs about perceived impact of the activities. While the mental models of the non-geoscientists focused more on the perceived negative environmental and economic impacts of geoscience, as well as providing evidence of lay expertise, those of the geoscientists focused more on human interactions. We argue that mental models of geoscientists and non-geoscientists are the result of beliefs, including both cognitive and affective components, and that both components need to be acknowledged for effective dialogue between the two groups to take place.

scholarly journals The human side of geoscientists: comparing geoscientists' and non-geoscientists' cognitive and affective responses to geology

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthea Lacchia ◽  
Geertje Schuitema ◽  
Fergus McAuliffe
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Economic Impacts ◽  
Affective Responses ◽  
Cognitive Responses ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Human Interactions ◽  
Perceived Impact ◽  
Affective Components ◽  
Human Side

Abstract. Geoscientists and non-geoscientists often struggle to communicate with each other. In this paper we aim to understand how geoscientists and non-geoscientists perceive geological concepts and processes, that is, how they think (cognitive responses) and feel (affective responses) about them. To this effect, using a mixed-methods approach, we compare mental models – people's representation of a phenomenon – of the subsurface, mining/quarrying, drilling, and flooding between geoscientists (n = 24) and non-geoscientists (n = 38). We identify four dominant themes which underlie their mental models: (1) degree of knowledge and familiarity, (2) beliefs about human interactions, (3) affective beliefs, and (4) beliefs about perceived impact of the processes. While the mental models of non-geoscientists focus more on the perceived negative environmental and economic impacts of geoscience, those of geoscientists focus more on human interactions. We argue that mental models are the result of beliefs, including both cognitive and affective components, and that both need to be acknowledged for effective dialogue between the two groups to take place.

scholarly journals A mixed-methods longitudinal evaluation of a one-day mental health wellness intervention

2016 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 244-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Doyle ◽  
Jan de Vries ◽  
Agnes Higgins ◽  
Brian Keogh ◽  
Padraig McBennett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Perceived Impact ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Wellness Intervention ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: This study evaluated the impact of a one-day mental health Wellness Workshop on participants’ mental health and attitudes towards mental health. Design: Convergent, longitudinal mixed-methods approach. Setting: The study evaluated Wellness Workshops which took place throughout the Republic of Ireland. Method: Questionnaires measuring hope, mental health self-efficacy, attitudes towards mental health and perceived impact on wellbeing were administered to participants before the workshop ( n = 415), 1 week after ( n = 221) and 3 months after ( n = 110). Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 24 participants to generate a more in-depth understanding of the impact of the workshop. Results: Quantitative findings relating to hope, mental health self-efficacy and attitudes towards mental health did not identify statistically significant changes; however, participants’ perceptions of the effect of the workshop on wellbeing suggested a positive impact which was maintained over time. Qualitative findings, however, suggested that hope and self-efficacy were improved and the simplicity and utility of the wellness strategies disseminated in the workshop, in addition to the warmth and openness of the narrative approach used by the facilitators, were central to the perceived positive impact. Conclusion: This evaluation demonstrates the potential for wellness interventions to have a subjective improvement in wellbeing in members of the general public.

scholarly journals Perceived Impact on Client Outcomes

SAGE Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 215824401769872 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina A. Rast ◽  
Daniel J. Herman ◽  
Tony G. Rousmaniere ◽  
Jason L. Whipple ◽  
Joshua K. Swift
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Clinical Supervision ◽  
Psychotherapy Training ◽  
Client Outcomes ◽  
Client Outcome ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Essential Component ◽  
Supervision Process ◽  
Perceived Impact

Clinical supervision is considered to be an essential component of psychotherapy training. However, research on supervisors’ ability to affect client outcome has been mixed. This investigation aims to answer two questions: (a) What is the perceived impact of supervision on client outcome, and (b) how important is it to supervisors and supervisees that supervision affects client outcome? A mixed-methods approach was used to examine the perspectives of both supervisors and supervisees. The survey consisted of survey questions and one open-ended qualitative question. Findings suggest that both supervisors and supervisees perceive supervision as beneficial and important for impacting client outcome. Supervisees perceive supervision as more important in impacting outcome than supervisors. Existing literature suggests that supervision may not have as significant an impact on client outcome as previously believed; however, supervisors and supervisees perceive the supervision process as essential for psychotherapy training. Implications and future directions are discussed.

Exploring Social Identity Among People with Disabilities: A Mixed-Methods Approach

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adena T. Rottenstein ◽  
Ryan J. Dougherty ◽  
Alexis Strouse ◽  
Lily Hashemi ◽  
Hilary Baruch
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Social Identity ◽  
People With Disabilities ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach

Constructing Pathways to Responsible Manhood

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-91
Author(s):  
Mellie Torres ◽  
Alejandro E. Carrión ◽  
Roberto Martínez
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Latino Men ◽  
Mixed Methods Approach ◽  
Counter Narratives ◽  
Latino Boys ◽  
The Media ◽  
Stark Contrast

Recent studies have focused on challenging deficit narratives and discourses perpetuating the criminalization of Latino men and boys. But even with this emerging literature, mainstream counter-narratives of young Latino boys and their attitudes towards manhood and masculinity stand in stark contrast to the dangerous and animalistic portrayals of Latino boys and men in the media and society. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, the authors draw on the notion of counter-storytelling to explore how Latino boys try to reframe masculinity, manhood, and what they label as ‘responsible manhood.’ Counter-storytelling and narratives provide a platform from which to challenge the discourse, narratives, and imaginaries guiding the conceptualization of machismo. In their counter-narratives, Latino boys critiqued how they are raced, gendered, and Othered in derogatory ways.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document