• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Minerva >Research Prioritization and the Potential Pitfall of Path Dependencies in Coral Reef Science
【24h】

Research Prioritization and the Potential Pitfall of Path Dependencies in Coral Reef Science

机译：珊瑚礁科学中的研究优先级和路径依赖的潜在陷阱

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Studies of how scientists select research problems suggest the process involves weighing a number of factors, including funding availability, likelihood of success versus failure, and perceived publishability of likely results, among others. In some fields, a strong personal interest in conducting science to bring about particular social and environmental outcomes plays an important role. Conservation biologists are frequently motivated by a desire that their research will contribute to improved conservation outcomes, which introduces a pair of challenging questions for managers of science and scholars of policies governing science: 1) How do scientists integrate that goal into their processes of research priority evaluation, and 2) How can managers and funders of science utilize that knowledge in designing and administering funding programs? I use Q method to uncover four distinct schools of thought amongst researchers and knowledge-users about the merits of possible research priorities for coral reefs; one of the axes along which these schools of thought differ is in their interpretation of how science can and should interact with policy. The results reveal that perceived severity of reef stressors plays a role for some participants. Disciplinary training does not appear to be a major influence on research priority evaluation, but individual participants indicated professional expediency does prevent some researchers from pursuing or advocating that others pursue topics outside of that disciplinary specialty. Influences on and processes in research prioritization uncovered in this study have the potential to lead to counterproductive disciplinary path dependencies. From these results and building on outside literature, I conclude that better coordination and communication about research priorities across disciplines and with broader stakeholders - including knowledge users - could improve the research enterprise's ability to contribute to meaningful societal and conservation goals. These findings are relevant to researchers and research administrators across disciplines that seek to conduct or fund science that is useful in addressing specific goals.
机译：有关科学家如何选择研究问题的研究表明，该过程涉及多个因素，包括资金可用性，成功与失败的可能性以及可能的结果的可感知性等。在某些领域，个人对进行科学以带来特定的社会和环境成果的浓厚兴趣很重要。保护生物学家经常受到其研究将有助于改善保护成果的愿望的激励，这为科学管理者和管理科学政策的学者带来了两个具有挑战性的问题：1）科学家如何将该目标整合到他们的研究重点中评估；以及2）科学的管理者和资助者如何在设计和管理资助计划时利用这些知识？我使用Q方法在研究人员和知识使用者之间揭示了关于珊瑚礁可能的研究重点的优点的四个不同的学派；这些思想流派不同的轴心之一是它们对科学如何以及应该如何与政策相互作用的解释。结果表明，对于某些参与者，礁石压力源的严重程度起着一定作用。学科培训似乎并没有对研究优先级评估产生重大影响，但是个别参与者表示，专业权宜确实会阻止某些研究人员追求或主张其他人追求该学科专业以外的主题。在这项研究中发现的对研究优先次序的影响和过程有可能导致适得其反的学科路径依赖。从这些结果并以外部文献为基础，我得出结论，跨学科并与包括知识用户在内的更广泛的利益相关者更好地协调和交流研究重点，可以提高研究企业为实现有意义的社会和保护目标做出贡献的能力。这些发现与寻求实施或资助对解决特定目标有用的科学的跨学科的研究人员和研究管理人员有关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号