Cargando…

Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations

Transdisciplinary research (TDR) collaborations are considered effective when they yield relevant results for science and practice. In this context, the different expectations, experiences, skills, and disciplines of the team members involved determine TDR collaboration. Using the example of 13 team...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Radinger-Peer, Verena, Schauppenlehner-Kloyber, Elisabeth, Penker, Marianne, Gugerell, Katharina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Japan 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9362005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35968230
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01192-1
_version_ 1784764639075106816
author Radinger-Peer, Verena
Schauppenlehner-Kloyber, Elisabeth
Penker, Marianne
Gugerell, Katharina
author_facet Radinger-Peer, Verena
Schauppenlehner-Kloyber, Elisabeth
Penker, Marianne
Gugerell, Katharina
author_sort Radinger-Peer, Verena
collection PubMed
description Transdisciplinary research (TDR) collaborations are considered effective when they yield relevant results for science and practice. In this context, the different expectations, experiences, skills, and disciplines of the team members involved determine TDR collaboration. Using the example of 13 team members involved in the 3-year TDR project ‘Römerland Carnuntum 2040’ (Austria), we aim to identify and compare diverse expectations regarding TDR collaboration. In doing so, we question the often emphasised dichotomy between science and practice as the main challenge of TDR collaboration and aim towards making individual expectations regarding TDR collaboration visible and tangible. The contribution of the present paper is twofold: on the one hand, we provide statements for a formative assessment to externalise implicit expectations, assumptions, and epistemologies of TDR project team members regarding TDR collaboration and results. On the other hand, we present the Q-methodology as a viable approach to uncover diverging viewpoints as visible, tangible, and enunciable differences that need to be acknowledged in early stages of TDR projects when allocating resources and planning further project steps. Our investigations result in two viewpoints: one emphasises learning, collective reflection, and knowledge exchange as the main TDR expectation. The second focuses on ‘changing practices’, assuming that the project supports the introduction of new practices for (sustainable) regional development. These diverging expectations reveal subconscious tensions, which have to be addressed when allocating resources and defining project success within the TDR project.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9362005
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer Japan
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93620052022-08-10 Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations Radinger-Peer, Verena Schauppenlehner-Kloyber, Elisabeth Penker, Marianne Gugerell, Katharina Sustain Sci Original Article Transdisciplinary research (TDR) collaborations are considered effective when they yield relevant results for science and practice. In this context, the different expectations, experiences, skills, and disciplines of the team members involved determine TDR collaboration. Using the example of 13 team members involved in the 3-year TDR project ‘Römerland Carnuntum 2040’ (Austria), we aim to identify and compare diverse expectations regarding TDR collaboration. In doing so, we question the often emphasised dichotomy between science and practice as the main challenge of TDR collaboration and aim towards making individual expectations regarding TDR collaboration visible and tangible. The contribution of the present paper is twofold: on the one hand, we provide statements for a formative assessment to externalise implicit expectations, assumptions, and epistemologies of TDR project team members regarding TDR collaboration and results. On the other hand, we present the Q-methodology as a viable approach to uncover diverging viewpoints as visible, tangible, and enunciable differences that need to be acknowledged in early stages of TDR projects when allocating resources and planning further project steps. Our investigations result in two viewpoints: one emphasises learning, collective reflection, and knowledge exchange as the main TDR expectation. The second focuses on ‘changing practices’, assuming that the project supports the introduction of new practices for (sustainable) regional development. These diverging expectations reveal subconscious tensions, which have to be addressed when allocating resources and defining project success within the TDR project. Springer Japan 2022-08-06 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9362005/ /pubmed/35968230 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01192-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Radinger-Peer, Verena
Schauppenlehner-Kloyber, Elisabeth
Penker, Marianne
Gugerell, Katharina
Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
title Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
title_full Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
title_fullStr Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
title_full_unstemmed Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
title_short Different perspectives on a common goal? The Q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
title_sort different perspectives on a common goal? the q-method as a formative assessment to elucidate varying expectations towards transdisciplinary research collaborations
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9362005/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35968230
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01192-1
work_keys_str_mv AT radingerpeerverena differentperspectivesonacommongoaltheqmethodasaformativeassessmenttoelucidatevaryingexpectationstowardstransdisciplinaryresearchcollaborations
AT schauppenlehnerkloyberelisabeth differentperspectivesonacommongoaltheqmethodasaformativeassessmenttoelucidatevaryingexpectationstowardstransdisciplinaryresearchcollaborations
AT penkermarianne differentperspectivesonacommongoaltheqmethodasaformativeassessmenttoelucidatevaryingexpectationstowardstransdisciplinaryresearchcollaborations
AT gugerellkatharina differentperspectivesonacommongoaltheqmethodasaformativeassessmenttoelucidatevaryingexpectationstowardstransdisciplinaryresearchcollaborations