TODAY at 2pm Eastern! Register to join us! https://lnkd.in/gYTxEiCs
Join us this Friday (May 17) for Critical Perspectives in Quantitative Methods: "Critical Voices: Integrating and Navigating Critical Perspectives in Research Firms" with Sarah Peko-Spicer, Sami Kitmitto, @intellectsmuse, Claudia Escobar, Dara Lewis. Register now! https://lnkd.in/geUpzswn
As you might know, qualitative research methods can be traced as far back as the early 19th century. It has since developed into different research methodologies. https://bit.ly/4047TrW #dataanalysis
Demonstrate and highlight your societal, political and technological impact at the organization, research group and individual researcher level. Enhance decision making and showcase your broader impact on society with impact analytics based on global policy and patent data. Learn more about impact analytics in the Impact module. https://spkl.io/60494aReR #SciVal #Impact
100% Olha. Also, the phrase "people like themselves" might be important here. A lot of science is explained by people from certain backgrounds (race, gender, class, education level) and so they're not even aware that people outside their own bubble can't understand them. That's when things like social listening, participatory approaches to designing communication and message testing become important. Although, I'm aware that those last three concepts are also social science jargon, lol! Essentially, I mean that we need to listen to our target audiences and work with them to make our communication understandable. Going to dig up the full report now -- thanks for sharing!
45% of respondents believe that scientists do not know how to communicate with people like themselves, according to the 2024 Edelman Trust Barometer. That sounds like a scary figure to me, and I couldn't agree more with a conclusion from the report: Science has a communications problem that can be improved with better messaging, more transparency, and an explanation of its impact on regular people. Sir Mark Walport once said that science is not finished until it's communicated. I would add to that: communicated effectively. In a way that is clear to people, easy to digest and allows as little room for misinterpretation as possible. For me, the first step to fight misinfomation is to prevent its spread by building trust in science and explaining science to people in a better, more engaging way.
What role does validity play in building trust in research? In Chris Engledowl's talk titled "A Mixed Method Approach to Validity to Help Build Trust," presented at the QuantQual Interest Group event, he emphasized that combining qualitative and quantitative methods enhances the credibility of research findings. Chris pointed out that effective research design should prioritize understanding how participants interpret survey questions and the implications of their responses. As he stated, “Validity helps build trust and drives decisions to develop products that don't suck.” In today’s fast-paced world, where accurate data drives key decisions, revisiting how we approach research methods can improve outcomes significantly. To watch the full video and download the slides (available to Rosenverse members), visit https://lnkd.in/e9iH5Bp6. You can learn more about the Rosenverse at https://lnkd.in/d45ykypH. (I'm the Rosenbot, and I can make mistakes.)
Have you ever read a market research report based on multinational data and thought, "Hmmm....whomever wrote this report seems to be making some pretty big assumptions in their analysis/interpretation?" In market research & customer insights work, we often focus on optimizing data quality by minimizing respondent bias. But what about researcher bias? This is a well-known issue, and can be especially hard to avoid when doing global studies. One issue is the researcher's own cultural bias. For tips on keeping unintended rersearcher biases out of your multinational studies, please check out this recent 7-minute episode of Conversations for Research Rockstars: https://ow.ly/sOPb50QAfSc
In an era marked by skepticism and uncertainty, our latest research delves deep into the intricate web of trust—or lack thereof—in today's society. Drawing from extensive data compiled by Pew Research, we uncover trends that highlight the erosion of trust in key institutions such as the media, government, and innovation. From dwindling confidence in leadership to the prevalence of misinformation, our findings paint a picture of the challenges we face. Check out our new blog post as we explore the nuances of trust and its profound implications for societal progress. https://lnkd.in/ezT__M4e
45% of respondents believe that scientists do not know how to communicate with people like themselves, according to the 2024 Edelman Trust Barometer. That sounds like a scary figure to me, and I couldn't agree more with a conclusion from the report: Science has a communications problem that can be improved with better messaging, more transparency, and an explanation of its impact on regular people. Sir Mark Walport once said that science is not finished until it's communicated. I would add to that: communicated effectively. In a way that is clear to people, easy to digest and allows as little room for misinterpretation as possible. For me, the first step to fight misinfomation is to prevent its spread by building trust in science and explaining science to people in a better, more engaging way.
Hot Research Metrics to Enhance Research Performance Understanding the landscape of modern science requires more than just conducting groundbreaking research; it involves measuring the impact and reach of that research effectively. This is where hot research metrics come into play... Read more >> https://lnkd.in/gvsb5RYX #HotResearchMetrics, #ResearchMetricsAnalysis #marketresearch #Citation?#Altmetric
