Animal Research, Accountability, Openness and Public Engagement: Report from an International Expert Forum

In November 2013, a group of international experts in animal research policy (n = 11) gathered in Vancouver, Canada, to discuss openness and accountability in animal research. The primary objective was to bring together participants from various jurisdictions (United States, Sweden, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Canada and the United Kingdom) to share practices regarding the governance of animals used in research, testing and education, with emphasis on the governance process followed, the methods of community engagement, and the balance of openness versus confidentiality. During the forum, participants came to a broad consensus on the need for: (a) evidence-based metrics to allow a “virtuous feedback” system for evaluation and quality assurance of animal research, (b) the need for increased public access to information, together with opportunities for stakeholder dialogue about animal research, (c) a greater diversity of views to be represented on decision-making committees to allow for greater balance and (d) a standardized and robust ethical decision-making process that incorporates some sort of societal input. These recommendations encourage aspirations beyond merely imparting information and towards a genuine dialogue that represents a shared agenda surrounding laboratory animal use.

A game of thrones: Organising and legitimising knowledge through PISA research

This study investigates knowledge structures and scientific communication using bibliometric methods to explore scientific knowledge production and dissemination. The aim is to develop knowledge about this growing field by investigating studies using international large-scale assessment (ILSA) data, with a specific focus on those using Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) data. As international organisations use ILSA to measure, assess and compare the success of national education systems, it is important to study this specific knowledge to understand how it is organised and legitimised within research. The findings show an interchange of legitimisation, where major actors from the USA and other English-speaking and westernised countries determine the academic discourse. Important epistemic cultures for PISA research are identified: the most important of which are situated within psychology and education. These two research environments are epicentres created by patterns of the referrals to and referencing of articles framing the formulation of PISA knowledge. Finally, it is argued that this particular PISA research is self-referential and self-authorising, which raises questions about whether research accountability leads to ‘a game of thrones’, where rivalry going on within the scientific field concerning how and on what grounds ‘facts’ and ‘truths’ are constructed, as a continuing process with no obvious winner.

They did not start the fire: reviewing and resolving the issue of physician stress and burnout

Purpose Physician stress and burnout is a serious and common concern in healthcare, with over half of physicians in the USA meeting at least one criterion for burnout. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach A review on current state of physician stress and burnout research, from 2008 to 2016, was undertaken. A subsequent perspective paper was shaped around these reviews. Findings Findings reveal research strength in prevalence and incidence with opportunities for stronger intervention studies. While descriptive studies on causes and consequences of physician burnout are available, studies on interventions and prevention of physician burnout are lacking. Future research on physician stress and burnout should incorporate intervention studies and take care to avoid limitations found in current research. Accountability and prevention of physician burnout is the responsibility of the healthcare industry as a whole, and organizational strategies must be emphasized in future research. Originality/value The value of this research comes in the original comprehensive review, international inclusion and succinct summary of physician burnout research and strategies.

Provisions of Trustworthiness in Critical Narrative Research: Bridging Intersubjectivity and Fidelity

This paper is a reflective-reflexive examination of provisions of trustworthiness in critical narrative research. The author presents her understanding of provisions of trustworthiness as a science and as an art, and blurs these boundaries as she acknowledges their tension in practice. She weaves between theory and her experience in two studies first the study of the Texas-Spain Visiting Teachers Program and secondly the study of Amish culture and education where the author felt a deep sense of responsibility that she maintain trustworthiness. This paper examines the provisions of trustworthiness as evidence of research accountability and shared responsibility and brings to the forefront an intersubjective understanding of fidelity that emerged through understanding participants struggles, seeing researcher as a co-struggler for cultural-political identity, and recognizing the role of politics in the work of action research for democratic education. In short, the author presents an intersubjective understanding of fidelity issues within multiple identities.

Playing and (not?) understanding the game: ECRs and university support

Purpose – The aging research community and current research accountability frameworks raise concerns about developing future researchers who have the capacity and commitment to undertake and lead quality research in the future. The aim of this paper is to focus on the support that Australian universities currently provide to build the capacity of their ECR staff and how ECRs are experiencing this support. Design/methodology/approach – Email interviews were used with early career education researchers (ECRs) to ask them how they experienced the research support structures provided by their institutions. Findings – It was found that the anxiety and frustration some ECRs feel about their research careers may stem from the appropriateness or otherwise of the kinds of immediate goals they are choosing for themselves and, perhaps more important, the extent to which they see themselves working in isolation from their colleagues. Practical implications – While different kinds of material support, such as reduced teaching loads and access to internal grant funds will always be important, it is argued that more attention needs to be given to realistic goal-setting for ECRs and a more patient, long-term approach to producing high-quality research. Originality/value – Developing a sustainable research community means building a supportive environment in which ECRs can achieve satisfaction and success. The research presented in this paper seeks to contribute to this goal by trying to learn more about the support ECRs currently experience in Australian universities.