•It suggests a meta-process for a higher research quality in humanitarian operations research.•It highlights a number of key methodological items to enhance the rigor and relevance of future ...studies.•It discusses the implications of the study for authors and reviewers of manuscripts.
Given the substantial costs of natural and man-made disasters (i.e., mortality, morbidity, and financial losses), scholars in operations management and operations research have conducted extensive research in the last decade in a humanitarian setting. A total of 43 studies that reviewed papers on disaster management and humanitarian operation and pointed out the research gaps in this field of study were published from 2006 to 2018. To enhance the rigor and relevance of future studies, this paper focuses on the methodological aspect of studies on humanitarian operations. The study highlights a set of vital items that should be considered when conducting research in a humanitarian setting: including the problem structuring, understanding the contextual factors in a humanitarian setting, acknowledging the uncertainties in humanitarian operations, incorporating uncertainty in the model, enabling technologies in model development and implementation, and selecting appropriate data and research methods. In addition, this study suggests a meta-process for research on humanitarian operations to target a higher level of research quality in this setting. The implications of the study for authors and reviewers of manuscripts and research proposals are discussed in the last section of the paper.
Poor research integrity is increasingly recognised as a serious problem in science. We outline some evidence for this claim and introduce the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) journals' ...Research Integrity Group, which has been created to address this problem.
Accounting education research is often considered not to be of comparable quality to other accounting research, thereby providing secondary careers for those researching within the niche ...sub-discipline. We present several factors that have influenced this perception, with the most notable being the various journal quality guides where specialist accounting education journals typically do not rank well. We also explore possible explanations for why specialist accounting education journals do not rank highly. We discuss the ill-defined and contested concept of research quality and research impact, concluding that the determination of research quality differs according to which stakeholder group is conducting the assessment; academe, the accounting profession, governments or students. We also discuss the findings from the three papers in this special issue and offer suggestions for future research in this area.
In recent years, there have been substantial efforts to combat corporate tax avoidance. These efforts have been propelled in part by mediatized case studies, conducted by non-governmental ...organizations (NGOs) and other groups, on the tax avoidance practices of multinational enterprises. These case studies have been criticized because they allegedly lack quality, but this criticism has not been assessed academically. This research seeks to address that gap. It proposes a new methodology to analyze the quality of these case studies systematically. We construct ten indicators related to alleged weaknesses and use these to assess 14 case studies involving Dutch corporate entities. We find that the quality of these case studies is affected negatively by a lack of adequate data. Thus, if companies and governments enhance transparency, this could increase the quality of case studies by NGOs and other groups. In addition to this, we find that the NGOs and other groups themselves can sometimes increase the quality of their case studies by investing in technical expertise and adopting practices that foster objectivity. The methodology developed for this study could also be of use for other topical debates, such as disclosure requirements and corporate social responsibility reporting. Whereas we were able to address challenges related to internal validity, the external validity of the findings could still be improved by extending the selection of case studies.
It is vital to be transparent and clear about empirically valid findings in treatment research to safeguard patients, provide guidance for policymakers, and facilitate the expansion of empirical ...knowledge. In the current article, we address the criticisms and allegations in Egan et al.'s (2023) critique of our meta-analytic replication (Smith et al., 2023) that assessed the efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapy for perfectionism (CBT-P). By reanalyzing data from 16 randomized controlled trials included in three meta-analytic reviews, we confirmed some limited support for CBT-P while highlighting that many participants do not experience reliable or sustained posttreatment improvements. Further, we found a lack of evidence of change in several pernicious elements of perfectionism and that the dropout rate was higher in treatment conditions than in control conditions, suggesting poor acceptability. In this rejoinder, we respond to Egan et al. (2023) and discuss what is needed to improve the quality of research and advance treatments for perfectionism. We underscore the ongoing necessity for continuous improvements and new developments that transcend existing paradigms and pave the way for more effective treatment strategies for people struggling with perfectionism.
Il est essentiel d'être clair et transparent sur les résultats empiriquement valides de la recherche sur les traitements afin de protéger les patients, de guider les décideurs politiques et de faciliter l'expansion des connaissances empiriques. Dans le présent article, nous répondons aux critiques et aux allégations formulées par Egan et al. (2023) à l'encontre de notre réplique méta-analytique (Smith et al., 2023) qui a évalué l'efficacité de la thérapie cognitivo-comportementale pour le perfectionnisme (TCC-P). En réanalysant les données de 16 essais contrôlés randomisés inclus dans trois revues méta-analytiques, nous avons confirmé un soutien limité pour la TCC-P tout en soulignant que de nombreux participants ne connaissent pas d'améliorations fiables ou soutenues après le traitement. En outre, nous avons constaté l'absence de preuves de changement dans plusieurs éléments pernicieux du perfectionnisme et un taux d'abandon plus élevé dans les conditions de traitement que dans les conditions de contrôle, ce qui laisse supposer une faible acceptabilité. Dans cette réplique, nous répondons à Egan et al. (2023) et discutons de ce qui est nécessaire pour améliorer la qualité de la recherche et faire progresser les traitements du perfectionnisme. Nous soulignons la nécessité d'améliorations continues et de nouveaux développements qui transcendent les paradigmes existants et ouvrent la voie à des stratégies de traitement plus efficaces pour les personnes qui luttent contre le perfectionnisme.
Public Significance Statement
There are indications that CBT-P can have limited efficacy for some features of perfectionism. However, our meta-analytic replication (Smith et al., 2023) showed that many participants do not experience reliable posttreatment improvements. Moreover, the extent to which those participants who do experience reliable improvements maintain them beyond posttreatment is unclear. Our results also indicated a higher dropout rate in treatment than in control conditions, pointing to challenges with the acceptability of CBT-P to participants. In this rejoinder, we address the critique presented by Egan et al. (2023), aiming to catalyze the development and refinement of more effective treatments for perfectionism.
•The paper examines how local university activities affect firm innovation inputs and outputs.•Geographical proximity from a firm to a local university only affects product innovation.•Degree ...programmes in areas of expertise useful for local firms favour their R&D collaborations.•Local university’s ISI-Scopus journal production negatively impacts firm product innovation.•Gender glass ceiling at local universities is detrimental to R&D university–firm collaboration.
The main aim of the paper is to examine the drivers of university–firm R&D collaboration while at the same time assessing the determinants of innovation in a low-tech industry. This includes analysing firm R&D collaborations with partners different from universities.
The paper relies on a unique data-set where firm data were sourced from the Capitalia survey, covering the 1995–2006 years, and the university data were gathered from a number of sources.
Result from a multivariate probit model reiterate that university–firm R&D collaboration affects process innovation. Evidence of a more novel kind suggests that product innovation is positively affected by geographical proximity to a university but is negatively affected by the amount of its codified knowledge production. Degree programmes in fields useful for local firms favour R&D collaborations. Academic policies that aim to commercialise research output negatively impact both product and process innovations of local firms.
The workload of most academics involves two main activities: research and teaching. Despite the dual nature of the work, career advancement usually chiefly depends on research performance. Since ...academics are rational actors, warnings are beginning to emerge that current predominantly research-based performance evaluation systems may be detrimental to creativity and innovation in teaching. This paper investigates the substance of these warnings by revisiting the relationship between research performance and teaching quality. Using a large cross-disciplinary sample of academics within a research-oriented university, we find, consistent with prior evidence, that research productivity is not related to teaching quality, whereas research quality is positively related with teaching quality. These findings discount fears that research-based performance evaluation in academia may be detrimental to teaching quality.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
BFBNIB, DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
The number of citations is becoming an increasingly popular index for measuring the impact of a scholar’s research or the quality of an academic department. One obvious question is: what are the ...factors that influence the number of citations that a paper receives? This study investigates the number of citations received by papers published in six well-known management science journals. It considers factors that relate to the author(s), the article itself, and the journal. The results show that the strongest factor is the journal itself; but other factors are also significant including the length of the paper, the number of references, the status of the first author’s institution, and the type of paper, especially if it is a review. Overall, this study provides some insights into the determinants of a paper’s impact that may be helpful for particular stakeholders to make important decisions.
Co-production is an umbrella term used to describe the process of generating knowledge through partnerships between researchers and those who will use or benefit from research. Multiple advantages of ...research co-production have been hypothesized, and in some cases documented, in both the academic and practice record. However, there are significant gaps in understanding how to evaluate the quality of co-production. This gap in rigorous evaluation undermines the potential of both co-production and co-producers.
This research tests the relevance and utility of a novel evaluation framework: Research Quality Plus for Co-Production (RQ + 4 Co-Pro). Following a co-production approach ourselves, our team collaborated to develop study objectives, questions, analysis, and results sharing strategies. We used a dyadic field-test design to execute RQ + 4 Co-Pro evaluations amongst 18 independently recruited subject matter experts. We used standardized reporting templates and qualitative interviews to collect data from field-test participants, and thematic assessment and deliberative dialogue for analysis. Main limitations include that field-test participation included only health research projects and health researchers and this will limit perspective included in the study, and, that our own co-production team does not include all potential perspectives that may add value to this work.
The field test surfaced strong support for the relevance and utility of RQ + 4 Co-Pro as an evaluation approach and framework. Research participants shared opportunities for fine-tuning language and criteria within the prototype version, but also, for alternative uses and users of RQ + 4 Co-Pro. All research participants suggested RQ + 4 Co-Pro offered an opportunity for improving how co-production is evaluated and advanced. This facilitated our revision and publication herein of a field-tested RQ + 4 Co-Pro Framework and Assessment Instrument.
Evaluation is necessary for understanding and improving co-production, and, for ensuring co-production delivers on its promise of better health.. RQ + 4 Co-Pro provides a practical evaluation approach and framework that we invite co-producers and stewards of co-production-including the funders, publishers, and universities who increasingly encourage socially relevant research-to study, adapt, and apply.
The BMRC has initiated a new initiative, the Behavioral Medicine Research Council (BMRC) Scientific Statement papers. The statement papers will move the field forward by guiding efforts to improve ...the quality of behavioral medicine research and practice and facilitate the dissemination and translation of behavioral medicine research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
PDF
