1,720,962 research outputs found
EDI in academic–policy engagement: lived experience of university based knowledge brokers and marginalised academics
Background:Discourse surrounding Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) has received significant attention within the UK academy and knowledge brokerage contexts, and more recently within academic–policy engagement spaces (Walker et al, 2019a; Fawcett, 2021; GOV.UK, 2021; Morris et al, 2021). Key players in this space identify the need for diversifying academic participation, as well as diversifying knowledges (GOV.UK, 2021; UK Parliament, 2018; UKRI, 2023). However, conceptual and practical insight on embedding EDI principles (and what they mean in this context) within academic–policy engagement processes is missing.Aims and objectives:Underpinned by feminist and decolonial epistemological concepts, this article addresses this gap by outlining strategies, and surfacing ways in which EDI within academic–policy engagement is experienced, conceptualised, understood and considered.Methods:Two parallel qualitative studies, with a total of 20 semi-structured narrative and realist interviews conducted with marginalised researchers (n=10, Study A) and university based knowledge brokers (n=10, Study B), and a rapid literature review. The analysis used a narrative and thematic framework.Findings and discussion:We found a want for EDI to go beyond just diversity of people and representation, towards fostering foundational principles of epistemic justice, equitable access, value-driven engagement and plurality. Academics and knowledge brokers reported both negative and positive experiences within this space that related to known EDI issues. We conclude that EDI cannot be standardised across higher education contexts, and emphasise the need for holistic, relational and plural approaches to EDI across academic–policy engagement systems through a value-led, equitable and ethical lens
Whose science is it anyway? Reflections on how equality, diversity, and inclusion principles in research and policy engagement strategies can improve policy outcomes as exemplified in health research and policy
Consideration of Equality, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) principles within the policy making process across the board will lead to more effective policy creation and implementation, and strengthen current research systems. By being deliberately interdisciplinary and intersectional in our approach to research and policy impact, we can aim to serve a wider scope of people in a way that matches the nuance, complexity, and variety of the lived experience. Finding effective policy engagement solutions must include consideration of EDI principles at each stage of the research-to-policy pipeline. This article offers introductory thoughts on how EDI can be practically implemented at the stages of research design and research funding to bring awareness to the need for embracing EDI principles. While we know that further information, data, and insight are needed when it comes to diversity in research, the research workforce, and funding allocation, our primary aim for this paper is to encourage reflection and critical assessment of how EDI might be considered at the very early stages of the evidence-to-policy pipeline
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
