Framing Questions Research Articles

What does "Diversity" Mean for Public Engagement in Science? A New Metric for Innovation Ecosystem Diversity.

Diversity is increasingly at stake in early 21st century. Diversity is often conceptualized across ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, sexual preference, and professional credentials, among other categories of difference. These are important and relevant considerations and yet, they are incomplete. Diversity also rests in the way we frame questions long before answers are sought. Such diversity in the framing (epistemology) of scientific and societal questions is important for they influence the types of data, results, and impacts produced by research. Errors in the framing of a research question, whether in technical science or social science, are known as type III errors, as opposed to the better known type I (false positives) and type II errors (false negatives). Kimball defined "error of the third kind" as giving the right answer to the wrong problem. Raiffa described the type III error as correctly solving the wrong problem. Type III errors are upstream or design flaws, often driven by unchecked human values and power, and can adversely impact an entire innovation ecosystem, waste money, time, careers, and precious resources by focusing on the wrong or incorrectly framed question and hypothesis. Decades may pass while technology experts, scientists, social scientists, funding agencies and management consultants continue to tackle questions that suffer from type III errors. We propose a new diversity metric, the Frame Diversity Index (FDI), based on the hitherto neglected diversities in knowledge framing. The FDI would be positively correlated with epistemological diversity and technological democracy, and inversely correlated with prevalence of type III errors in innovation ecosystems, consortia, and knowledge networks. We suggest that the FDI can usefully measure (and prevent) type III error risks in innovation ecosystems, and help broaden the concepts and practices of diversity and inclusion in science, technology, innovation and society.

Effect of transport transfer quality on intercity passenger mode choice

Intercity transport is the forgotten step child of transportation behavioural research; so many important questions, such as how important are the various attributes of transfer quality in a traveller’s journey, are not often examined. Intermodal and multimodal passenger transport, unlike intermodal freight transport, carry the unique combination of a requirement to transfer between vehicles, in addition to cargo (passengers) with the ability to choose other modes based on a wide variety of factors including difficulty of transfer, availability of automatic baggage transfer and comfort. Our research aims to shed light on the relative importance and interrelations of these transfer attributes by analysing the limited range of European studies that value transfer quality attributes and compare and contrast them with each other. To support this, we collect our own study data which are used to evaluate questions that arose out of the analysis. The few studies that value European intercity transfers vary widely in their valuations, and so taking into context the countries, methodologies, samples, question framing and other metrics specific to each study, we establish links between the valuations and other data not explicitly discussed in those studies to the end of presenting a framework for understanding passenger valuation of intercity transfers. We also suggest some driving factors that may affect one or more of the transfer quality attributes that have not been discussed in the literature, such as perceived trip difficulty and traveller expectations.This work illustrates and investigates the various elements that may affect how passengers perceive the connections required for travel across transport networks and how they make choices based on those perceptions.

Semantic annotation of consumer health questions

BackgroundConsumers increasingly use online resources for their health information needs. While current search engines can address these needs to some extent, they generally do not take into account that most health information needs are complex and can only fully be expressed in natural language. Consumer health question answering (QA) systems aim to fill this gap. A major challenge in developing consumer health QA systems is extracting relevant semantic content from the natural language questions (question understanding). To develop effective question understanding tools, question corpora semantically annotated for relevant question elements are needed. In this paper, we present a two-part consumer health question corpus annotated with several semantic categories: named entities, question triggers/types, question frames, and question topic. The first part (CHQA-email) consists of relatively long email requests received by the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM) customer service, while the second part (CHQA-web) consists of shorter questions posed to MedlinePlus search engine as queries. Each question has been annotated by two annotators. The annotation methodology is largely the same between the two parts of the corpus; however, we also explain and justify the differences between them. Additionally, we provide information about corpus characteristics, inter-annotator agreement, and our attempts to measure annotation confidence in the absence of adjudication of annotations.ResultsThe resulting corpus consists of 2614 questions (CHQA-email: 1740, CHQA-web: 874). Problems are the most frequent named entities, while treatment and general information questions are the most common question types. Inter-annotator agreement was generally modest: question types and topics yielded highest agreement, while the agreement for more complex frame annotations was lower. Agreement in CHQA-web was consistently higher than that in CHQA-email. Pairwise inter-annotator agreement proved most useful in estimating annotation confidence.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, our corpus is the first focusing on annotation of uncurated consumer health questions. It is currently used to develop machine learning-based methods for question understanding. We make the corpus publicly available to stimulate further research on consumer health QA.

Neal Stephenson and the Franchise-State: Questioning Preconceptions of Nation-States and Borders from a Legal Perspective

Migration and borders have been placed at the centre of recent political movements. Populist right-wing candidates in countries throughout Europe and in the US have built momentum by demonising migrants and calling for the institution of strong borders. Much of this political rhetoric is driven by agendas of cultural preservation and domestic prioritising of so called indigenous national populations. The maintenance and preservation of the home country is privileged above any consideration of wider humanity. The concept of the nation-state, with its inherent notion of borders, seem embedded in these ideas. By looking beyond the conventional arena of state theorising – law, politics, international relations etc. – can a new perspective be found to move past this impasse? Using Neal Stephenson's novel Snow Crash this article seeks to find a new conceptual position from which to consider prevailing narratives surrounding borders and migration. Attempting to conceive of an alternative way to frame questions stemming from considerations of national identity and geographic space, especially from the perspective of the central legal document to these processes, the constitution.

Concept learning through question framing in Pharmacology

Background: Framing questions is a skill that requires expertise, knowledge, guidance and mentoring. It provides structure for deep learning, critical thinking and also promotes interaction and communication. Objective of this study is to analyze the question framing skills of fifth semester medical students on a ‘must know’ area in Pharmacology.Methods: A cross-sectional study was done in the Department of Pharmacology of a Government Medical College in Central Kerala. After briefing about the study, each of the participants was instructed to frame a question which were collected after 15 minutes. The data on different aspects of questions was analysed by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 16.Results: Total 130 students, 79 females and 51 males participated in this study. 7 questions were incomplete and excluded from further analysis. From the rest 123 properly framed questions, 106(86.2%) were correct, 10(8.1%) were partially correct and 7(5.7%) incorrect with regards to the task assigned. In this study knowledge as well as application was tested in 50.4% questions, comprehension in 21.1% and application alone in 22.8%. The knowledge dimension tested was factual in 91(74%) and conceptual in 32(26%). Non-hierarchical classification showed 96(78%) convergent and 27(22%) divergent.Conclusions: In this study majority of the participants framed direct short answer questions which reflects factual knowledge indicating their lower-level cognition. Critical thinking and procurement of higher level cognition can be attained by directing them to frame the right question especially in medical education.

Law and Technology: Two Modes of Disruption, Three Legal MindSets, and the Big Picture of Regulatory Responsibilities

This article introduces three ideas that are central to understanding the ways in which law and legal thinking are disrupted by emerging technologies and to maintaining a clear focus on the responsibilities of regulators. The first idea is that of a double disruption that technological innovation brings to the law. While the first disruption tells us that the old rules are no longer fit for purpose and need to be revised and renewed, the second tells us that, even if the rules have been changed, regulators might now be able to dispense with the use of rules (the rules are redundant) and rely instead on technological instruments. The second idea is that the double disruption leads to a threeway legal and regulatory mind-set that is divided between: (i) traditional concerns for coherence in the law; (ii) modern concerns with instrumental effectiveness; and (iii) a continuing concern with instrumental effectiveness and risk management but now focused on the possibility of employing technocratic solutions. The third idea is one of a hierarchy of regulatory responsibilities. Most importantly, regulators have a ‘stewardship’ responsibility for maintaining the ‘commons’; then they have a responsibility to respect the fundamental values of a particular human social community; and, finally, they have a responsibility to seek out an acceptable balance of legitimate interests within their community. Such disruptions notwithstanding, it is argued that those who have regulatory responsibilities need to be able to think through the regulatory noise to frame questions in the right way and to respond in ways that are rationally defensible and reasonable. In an age of smart machines and new possibilities for technological fixes, traditional institutional designs might need to be reviewed.

A Matter of Discretion: The Politics of Catholic Priests in the United States and Ireland by Brian R. Calfano, Melissa R. Michelson, and Elizabeth A. Oldmixon

Reviewed by: A Matter of Discretion: The Politics of Catholic Priests in the United States and Ireland by Brian R. Calfano, Melissa R. Michelson, and Elizabeth A. Oldmixon Mary L. Gautier A Matter of Discretion: The Politics of Catholic Priests in the United States and Ireland. By Brian R. Calfano, Melissa R. Michelson, and Elizabeth A. Oldmixon. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2017. 210 pp. $80.00. The purpose of this book is to explore, with a certain amount of scientific rigor, the extent that Roman Catholic priests, as “street-level bureaucrats,” negotiate their role as church elites in explaining, implementing, and enforcing church teachings to their parishioners. Priests have their own political attitudes and behaviors, certainly, as individual political actors. But as church elites, “situated in vast, voluntary associational networks, a priest’s job is to provide moral leadership to his local community” (3). They communicate the moral teachings of the church, primarily to their parishioners. But they do not necessarily agree with all that the church teaches or rigidly adhere to every political stance of the church. They use discretion to negotiate internally “what characterization of their professional roles they will cognitively draw on in responding to their employer’s institutional preferences while ensuring parishioner approbation” (4). In other words, priests must balance expectations from their bishops (who are above them in church hierarchy) and expectations from their parishioners (who, in essence, pay their salary) to communicate just the right message to satisfy both influence groups while maintaining their personal integrity. The authors employ survey research to explore some of the political attitudes and behaviors of Catholic priests in the United States and Ireland (more on that in a bit), and perform an empirical test of “the extent to which priests act with discretion in representing church teaching to the public” (155). The study is unique in that it is the first to examine the data through the lens of the potentially competing expectations priests face from their different reference groups—bishops and parishioners. The authors created an online survey of both closed-ended and open-ended questions and offered it to a sample of priests in the United States and Ireland (modified slightly for the Irish priests to reflect [End Page 81] differences in party identification and political policy particular to Ireland). They created two blocks of questions designed to explore the impact of frame of reference on political attitudes and behaviors of priests. One block, named the “Personal frame” by the researchers, measured different aspects of professional stress experienced by priests. The other block, named the “Institutional frame,” included “questions about promoting politically salient church teachings, parish financial health, and relationships with one’s bishop” (53). They then manipulated the order of questions in the survey to test the effect of these framing questions on priests’ political attitudes and behaviors. Finally, the authors experimented with an email test to see whether and how referencing the bishops or parishioners reference groups’ beliefs would affect the priests’ responses to a question about a controversial church teaching (receiving communion at Mass if one holds a pro-choice position on abortion). The study is well-designed and methodologically sound. The authors found, and report, significant differences in a number of political attitudes and behaviors that vary according to whether the Personal frame or Institutional frame blocks appeared before or after the questions about political attitudes and behaviors. The effects were particularly notable among U.S. priests and stronger for the Institutional frame than for the Personal frame. They found similar effects in the email tests—including reference groups did affect priests’ responses to a politically sensitive question. This book represents a first attempt at applying more rigorous experimental design methods to the field of religion and politics. As such, its findings are necessarily preliminary and sure to be challenged by others. The authors welcome the challenge and hope that the book will stimulate more use of experimental design methods in this area. Personally, while I enjoyed reading the comparison to Irish priests, it read like an afterthought and I think the book would have been stronger without it. This book makes a contribution to the politics and religion literature in the...

300 лет системе российских следственных органов

The article is dedicated to the 300th anniversary of establishment of the Russian investigative body system — major investigative offices established on December 9, 1717, by typical instructions of Peter the Great. The article notes that the question of the time frame of the Russian investigative body establishment is interpreted differently in historical and legal research works; and reviews the existing approaches to definition of investigative bodies in the narrow sense (as independent state bodies specially authorized to investigate criminal cases at the pre-trial stage) and the broad sense (as all state bodies and their officials having investigated criminal cases at the pre-trial stage along with performance of other functions). The author justifies that the establishment of six investigative offices headed by the officers of the Preobrazhensky and Semenovsky Regiments in December, 1717, became the establishment of a system of the first Russian independent preliminary investigative bodies. Attention is paid to the need to study historical experience of the investigative body system structure. The author concludes that Peter the Great’s ideas concerning investigative body arrangement retained their relevance in the modern Russia and were implemented by creation of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation as an independent state body specially authorized to investigate criminal cases, which is governed by the head of the state like in the time of Peter the Great. The article lists the available areas to study history of the Russian investigative bodies; draws attention to the importance of review of lives of specific investigators of the past and the criminal cases they worked on as positive and negative examples for professional, patriotic and moral upbringing of investigators; points out the need to create an academic discipline — History of Russian Investigative Bodies.

The Pluralistic Water Research Concept: A New Human-Water System Research Approach

The use and management of water systems is influenced by a number of factors, such as economic growth, global change (e.g., urbanization, hydrological-climatic changes), politics, history and culture. Despite noteworthy efforts to develop integrative approaches to analyze water-related problems, human-water research remains a major challenge for scholars and decision makers due to the increasing complexity of human and water systems interactions. Although existing concepts try to integrate the social and water dimensions, they usually have a disciplinary starting point and perspective, which can represent an obstacle to true integration in human-water research. Hence, a pluralistic approach is required to better understand the interactions between human and water systems. This paper discusses prominent human-water concepts (Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM), socio-hydrology, and political ecology/hydrosocial approach) and presents a newly developed concept termed pluralistic water research (PWR). This is not only a pluralistic but also an integrative and interdisciplinary approach which aims to coherently and comprehensively integrate human-water dimensions. The different concepts are illustrated in a synopsis, and diverse framing of research questions are exemplified. The PWR concept integrates physical and social sciences, which enables a comprehensive analysis of human-water interactions and relations. This can lead to a better understanding of water-related issues and potentially sustainable trajectories.

Eliciting Risk Attitudes in the Field: Surveys or Experimental Methods? An Empirical Comparison in Rural Niger

We compare several risk preference elicitation methods – including incentivised, non-incentivised, and framed methods as well as a traditional Likert survey question – in a developing country and empirically test how well consequent measures of risk attitudes predict risk taking behaviour. We find that Likert scale and non-incentivised framed survey questions are not sufficient substitutes for costlier incentivised methods in rural Niger. Instead, the incentivised framed question works best while a simplified incentivised lottery question works almost as well. More risk and ambiguity averse farmers are less likely to adopt fertiliser microdosing indicating the importance of insurance and strategies to promote learning.

Il pragmatismo di Nietzsche. Saggi sul pensiero prospettivistico

Il pragmatismo di Nietzsche. Saggi sul pensiero prospettivistico

A five-step approach for stakeholder engagement in prioritisation and planning of environmental evidence syntheses

Systematic reviews and systematic maps, regarded as a gold standard for syntheses of documented research evidence, are increasingly used to inform decisions in environmental management. To increase their relevance and uptake, systematic reviews and maps can be planned with the help and engagement of stakeholders, i.e. organisations and individuals involved in and affected by environmental policy-making and practice. We report on the emprically tested five-step approach that the Mistra Council for Evidence-based Environmental Management (EviEM) is using to engage stakeholders and incorporate their views and opinions in the prioritisation and planning of reviews, including (1) stakeholder identification; (2) identification of policy- and practice-relevant topics; (3) framing and prioritisation of review questions; (4) establishment of the specific scope of a review; and (5) a public review of a draft review protocol. We provide examples from EviEM’s reviews and describe various challenges and valuable lessons learnt from the engagement process, hoping that this will be useful reading not only for reviewers, but also for stakeholders who plan to participate in the engagement process.

Questions and answers in health care and education

Questions and answers are integral to the practice of health professionals and their education. Health professionals are taught to ask questions and we expect that patients will answer them. We may also invite patients to ask questions without considering that this may be difficult due to many factors including professional hierarchies. Choosing Wisely is a global initiative that frames questions for patients to ask in relation to tests and treatments. The same concept has been applied to health professional education with students and trainees also being encouraged to question their seniors about their choice of investigations and management. Now is the time for learners to also question how they are educated for their health profession. Their education should be evidence-guided and not solely informed by tradition. Asking and answering questions with respect and honesty is likely to enhance partnerships across the continuum of health and education.

Consequences, norms, and generalized inaction in moral dilemmas: The CNI model of moral decision-making.

Research on moral dilemma judgments has been fundamentally shaped by the distinction between utilitarianism and deontology. According to the principle of utilitarianism, the moral status of behavioral options depends on their consequences; the principle of deontology states that the moral status of behavioral options depends on their consistency with moral norms. To identify the processes underlying utilitarian and deontological judgments, researchers have investigated responses to moral dilemmas that pit one principle against the other (e.g., trolley problem). However, the conceptual meaning of responses in this paradigm is ambiguous, because the central aspects of utilitarianism and deontology-consequences and norms-are not manipulated. We illustrate how this shortcoming undermines theoretical interpretations of empirical findings and describe an alternative approach that resolves the ambiguities of the traditional paradigm. Expanding on this approach, we present a multinomial model that allows researchers to quantify sensitivity to consequences (C), sensitivity to moral norms (N), and general preference for inaction versus action irrespective of consequences and norms (I) in responses to moral dilemmas. We present 8 studies that used this model to investigate the effects of gender, cognitive load, question framing, and psychopathy on moral dilemma judgments. The findings obtained with the proposed CNI model offer more nuanced insights into the determinants of moral dilemma judgments, calling for a reassessment of dominant theoretical assumptions. (PsycINFO Database Record

The framing of research questions using the PICOT format in randomized controlled trials of venous ulcer disease is suboptimal: A systematic survey.

Despite several publications on venous ulcers, there is still a lack of evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to support certain treatments for patients with this disorder. Well-designed research questions using the PICOT (Population; Intervention; Comparator; Outcome; Time-frame) format in RCTs can improve the quality of research. The objectives of this study were to assess how the PICOT format is used to frame research questions in RCTs published on venous ulcer disease and to determine the factors associated with better adherence to the PICOT format. We conducted a systematic survey of RCTs on venous ulcers published in the PubMed database between January 2009 and May 2016. All RCTs published in English addressing therapeutic interventions for venous ulcer disease in human subjects were included. We examined whether the five elements of the PICOT format were used in formulating the research question and scored them between 0 and 5. The primary outcome of this systematic survey was the percentage of studies that adequately reported all five PICOT elements. Eighty-five (85) RCTs were included with median PICOT score of 3 (IQR = 1.5). Four elements of PICOT were present in 28 reports (32.9%) and only 2 RCTS (2.3%) reported all the PICOT elements. Population and intervention were often appropriately described, in (70/85) 82.4% and (83/85) 97.6% of the studies, respectively; however, comparison intervention and outcome were presented in only (53/85) 62.3% and (48/85) 56.5% of studies, respectively. Very few RCTs (7.1%; 6/85) reported the study time frame. No journal or RCT characteristics were found to be significantly associated with better reporting. Use of the PICOT format to frame research questions in RCTs published on venous ulcers is suboptimal, and our study reinforces the importance of framing a good research question to improve the design of trials and quality of evidence in venous ulcer disease.

Improving the use of crop models for risk assessment and climate change adaptation

Crop models are used for an increasingly broad range of applications, with a commensurate proliferation of methods. Careful framing of research questions and development of targeted and appropriate methods are therefore increasingly important. In conjunction with the other authors in this special issue, we have developed a set of criteria for use of crop models in assessments of impacts, adaptation and risk. Our analysis drew on the other papers in this special issue, and on our experience in the UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 and the MACSUR, AgMIP and ISIMIP projects.The criteria were used to assess how improvements could be made to the framing of climate change risks, and to outline the good practice and new developments that are needed to improve risk assessment. Key areas of good practice include: i. the development, running and documentation of crop models, with attention given to issues of spatial scale and complexity; ii. the methods used to form crop-climate ensembles, which can be based on model skill and/or spread; iii. the methods used to assess adaptation, which need broadening to account for technological development and to reflect the full range options available.The analysis highlights the limitations of focussing only on projections of future impacts and adaptation options using pre-determined time slices. Whilst this long-standing approach may remain an essential component of risk assessments, we identify three further key components:1.Working with stakeholders to identify the timing of risks. What are the key vulnerabilities of food systems and what does crop-climate modelling tell us about when those systems are at risk?2.Use of multiple methods that critically assess the use of climate model output and avoid any presumption that analyses should begin and end with gridded output.3.Increasing transparency and inter-comparability in risk assessments. Whilst studies frequently produce ranges that quantify uncertainty, the assumptions underlying these ranges are not always clear. We suggest that the contingency of results upon assumptions is made explicit via a common uncertainty reporting format; and/or that studies are assessed against a set of criteria, such as those presented in this paper.

The journeying self: From narcissism to solidarity and doxology

AbstractUnder the sign of “the journeying self,” I offer a sketch of a Christian pilgrimage from narcissism to solidarity and doxology. Developmental psychology can help frame questions about growth in self-awareness from childhood (Fivush) to early adulthood (Habermas). Often this kind of growth is expressed in the language of narrative (Ricoeur), but a “minority report” summarizes several different critiques of life narratives – in the work of Derek Parfit, Galen Strawson, Hayden White, and Jean-Francois Lyotard, among others. Nevertheless, a positive assessment of narrative recommences, thanks in part to Twenge’s interest in how human beings can reach out beyond themselves to others and to God (Josselson, McAdams). A reflection on Psalm 51 seeks to help pilgrims further along a path from narcissism to solidarity with others and further on toward doxology.

What You Ask Is What You Get: Citizens’ Support for Military Action, But Not Diplomacy, Depends on Question Framing

AbstractDrawing on past research on judgment and decision making, as well as preference reversal, we investigated the impact of question framing on support for military versus diplomatic conflict resolution strategies. In three studies with two heterogeneous samples from the United States and one representative sample from Israel, preferences for military action were substantially stronger when asked in isolation (i.e., “yes/no” [support/reject]) rather than in conjunction with the alternative of diplomacy (i.e., “either‐or” [military or diplomacy]), sometimes even causing a complete reversal from majority support for military action to majority support for diplomacy. These findings point to problems in public opinion polls and scientific research on military support (usually presenting no alternatives), and address issues important for psychology, political science, sociology, and survey methodology. In a real world context, our findings have important implications for governmental decisions on conflict resolution strategies and the implementation of policies based on public opinion.

Over-reaction and under-reaction in climate policy: an institutional analysis

ABSTRACTIn what circumstances do organizations react to changes in their operating environment by adopting proportionate policy responses? And drawing on institutional theory, what expectations can we formulate in relation to the proportionality of policy responses to climate change? These two research questions frame this article, which seeks to make new connections between the emerging perspective of proportionality in policy-making and existing institutional theories. We find that institutional theories are well suited to formulating expectations concerning the (dis)proportionality of policy responses, but their explanatory power can be further improved by taking the characteristics of specific climate policy problems into account. While there are many different problems nested in the ‘meta’ problem of climate change, we find that most of them have characteristics which suggest that policy under-reactions are more, not less likely. Amongst institutional theories, rational choice institutionalism provides the clearest expectation that proportionate policy responses are unlikely. Policy entrepreneurship is identified as one obvious way in which to stimulate proportionate policy responses, through fostering new ways of thinking within organizations.

In Dialogue with the Decorative Arts

ABSTRACTHow can museum educators create dialogical experiences with European decorative arts? This question frames my essay and stems from the challenges I have faced introducing objects whose original functions seem to overshadow their aesthetic and interpretive value. Repeated efforts to spark rich dialogue and collective interpretation around pieces of decorative art at The Frick Collection, specifically, has shown that, whereas painting and sculpture inspire responses that are not just formal in nature but also subjective and even phenomenological, clocks, commodes, porcelain and other such objects are seemingly less accessible, met with apparent discomfort, and confronted with the following questions: What was this used for? How was it made? How much did it cost? What is its provenance? Painting and sculpture, especially canonical examples of each, seem immune to this line of questioning and thus riper for dialogical engagement as defined by museum educators Rika Burnham and Elliott Kai-Kee. Without devaluing the importance of technical art history, functionality, materiality, and the history of collecting, I will explore how museum education – and the visitor experience broadly defined – is affected by the canon of art history’s hierarchical categorization of the fine and decorative arts.