future of research methods

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 27 January 2022

The future of human behaviour research

• Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier 1 ,
• Jean Burgess 2 , 3 ,
• Maurizio Corbetta 4 , 5 ,
• Kate Crawford 6 , 7 , 8 ,
• Esther Duflo 9 ,
• Laurel Fogarty 10 ,
• Alison Gopnik 11 ,
• Sari Hanafi 12 ,
• Mario Herrero 13 ,
• Ying-yi Hong 14 ,
• Yasuko Kameyama 15 ,
• Tatia M. C. Lee 16 ,
• Gabriel M. Leung 17 , 18 ,
• Daniel S. Nagin 19 ,
• Anna C. Nobre 20 , 21 ,
• Merete Nordentoft 22 , 23 ,
• Aysu Okbay 24 ,
• Andrew Perfors 25 ,
• Laura M. Rival 26 ,
• Cassidy R. Sugimoto 27 ,
• Bertil Tungodden 28 &
• Claudia Wagner 29 , 30 , 31  

Nature Human Behaviour volume  6 ,  pages 15–24 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

62k Accesses

27 Citations

183 Altmetric

Metrics details

Human behaviour is complex and multifaceted, and is studied by a broad range of disciplines across the social and natural sciences. To mark our 5th anniversary, we asked leading scientists in some of the key disciplines that we cover to share their vision of the future of research in their disciplines. Our contributors underscore how important it is to broaden the scope of their disciplines to increase ecological validity and diversity of representation, in order to address pressing societal challenges that range from new technologies, modes of interaction and sociopolitical upheaval to disease, poverty, hunger, inequality and climate change. Taken together, these contributions highlight how achieving progress in each discipline will require incorporating insights and methods from others, breaking down disciplinary silos.

Genuine progress in understanding human behaviour can only be achieved through a multidisciplinary community effort. Five years after the launch of Nature Human Behaviour , twenty-two leading experts in some of the core disciplines within the journal’s scope share their views on pressing open questions and new directions in their disciplines. Their visions provide rich insight into the future of research on human behaviour.

Artificial intelligence

Kate Crawford

Much has changed in artificial intelligence since a small group of mathematicians and scientists gathered at Dartmouth in 1956 to brainstorm how machines could simulate cognition. Many of the domains that those men discussed — such as neural networks and natural language processing — remain core elements of the field today. But what they did not address was the far-reaching social, political, legal and ecological effects of building these systems into everyday life: it was outside their disciplinary view.

Since the mid-2000s, artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly expanded as a field in academia and as an industry, and now a handful of powerful technology corporations deploy these systems at a planetary scale. There have been extraordinary technical innovations, from real-time language translation to predicting the 3D structures of proteins 1 , 2 . But the biggest challenges remain fundamentally social and political: how AI is widening power asymmetries and wealth inequality, and creating forms of harm that need to be prioritized, remedied and regulated.

The most urgent work facing the field today is to research and remediate the costs and consequences of AI. This requires a deeper sociotechnical approach that can contend with the complex effect of AI on societies and ecologies. Although there has been important work done on algorithmic fairness in recent years 3 , 4 , not enough has been done to address how training data fundamentally skew how AI models interpret the world from the outset. Second, we need to address the human costs of AI, which range from discrimination and misinformation to the widespread reliance on underpaid labourers (such as the crowd-workers who train AI systems for as little as US $2 per hour) 5 . Third, there must be a commitment to reversing the environmental costs of AI, including the exceptionally high energy consumption of the current large computational models, and the carbon footprint of building and operating modern tensor processing hardware 6 . Finally, we need strong regulatory and policy frameworks, expanding on the EU’s draft AI Act of 2021.

By building a more interdisciplinary and inclusive AI field, and developing a more rigorous account of the full impacts of AI, we give engineers and regulators alike the tools that they need to make these systems more sustainable, equitable and just.

Kate Crawford is Research Professor at the Annenberg School, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Senior Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research New York, New York, NY, USA; and the Inaugural Visiting Chair of AI and Justice at the École Normale Supérieure, Paris, France.

Anthropology

Laura M. Rival

The field of anthropology faces fundamental questions about its capacity to intervene more effectively in political debates. How can we use the knowledge that we already have to heal the imagined whole while keeping people in synchrony with each other and with the world they aspire to create for themselves and others?

The economic systems that sustain modern life have produced pernicious waste cultures. Globalization has accelerated planetary degradation and global warming through the continuous release of toxic waste. Every day, like millions of others, I dutifully clean and prepare my waste for recycling. I know it is no more than a transitory measure geared to grant manufacturers time to adjust and adapt. Reports that most waste will not be recycled, but dumped or burned, upset me deeply. How can anthropology remain a critical project in the face of such orchestrated cynicism, bad faith and indifference? How should anthropologists deploy their skills and bring a sense of shared responsibility to the task of replenishing the collective will?

To help to find answers to these questions, anthropologists need to radically rethink the ways in which we describe the processes and relations that tie communities to their environments. The extinction of experience (loss of direct contact with nature) that humankind currently suffers is massive, but not irreversible. New forms of storytelling have successfully challenged modernist myths, particularly their homophonic promises 7 . But there remain persistent challenges, such as the seductive and rampant power of one-size-fits-all progress, and the actions of elites, who thrive on emulation, and in doing so fuel run-away consumerism.

To combat these challenges, I simply reassert that ‘nature’ is far from having outlasted its historical utility. Anthropologists must join forces and reanimate their common exploration of the immense possibilities contained in human bodies and minds. No matter how overlooked or marginalized, these natural potentials hold the key to what keeps life going.

Laura M. Rival is Professor of Anthropology of Nature, Society and Development, ODID and SAME, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK .

Communication and media studies

Jean Burgess

The communication and media studies field has historically been animated by technological change. In the process, it has needed to navigate fundamental tensions: communication can be understood as both transmission (of information), and as (social) ritual 8 ; relatedly, media can be understood as both technology and as culture 9 .

The most important technological change over the past decade has been the ‘platformization’ 10 of the media environment. Large digital platforms owned by the world’s most powerful technology companies have come to have an outsized and transformative role in the transmission (distribution) of information, and in mediating social practices (whether major events or intimate daily routines). In response, digital methods have transformed the field. For example, advances in computational techniques enabled researchers to study patterns of communication on social media, leading to disciplinary trends such as the quantitative description of ‘hashtag publics’ in the mid-2010s 11 .

Platforms’ uses of data, algorithms and automation for personalization, content moderation and governance constitute a further major shift, giving rise to new methods (such as algorithmic audits) that go well beyond quantitative description 12 . But platform companies have had a patchy — at times hostile — relationship to independent research into their societal role, leading to data lockouts and even public attacks on researchers. It is important in the interests of public oversight and open science that we coordinate responses to such attempts to suppress research 13 , 14 .

As these processes of digital transformation continue, new connections between the humanities and technical disciplines will be necessary, giving rise to a new wave of methodological innovation. This next phase will also require more hybrid (qualitative and quantitative; computational and critical) methods 15 , not only to get around platform lockouts but also to ensure more careful attention is paid to how the new media technologies are used and experienced in everyday life. Here, innovative approaches such as the use of data donations can both aid the ‘platform observability’ 16 that is essential to accountability, and ensure that our research involves the perspectives of diverse audiences.

Jean Burgess is Professor of Digital Media at the School of Communication and Digital Media Research Centre (DMRC), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland Australia; and Associate Director at the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .

Computational social science

Claudia Wagner

Computational social science has emerged as a discipline that leverages computational methods and new technologies to collect, model and analyse digital behavioural data in natural environments or in large-scale designed experiments, and combine them with other data sources (such as survey data).

While the community made critical progress in enhancing our understanding about empirical phenomena such as the spread of misinformation 17 and the role of algorithms in curating misinformation 18 , it has focused less on questions about the quality and accessibility of data, the validity, reliability and reusability of measurements, the potential consequences of measurements and the connection between data, measurement and theory.

I see the following opportunities to address these issues.

First, we need to establish privacy-preserving, shared data infrastructures that collect and triangulate survey data with scientifically motivated organic or designed observational data from diverse populations 19 . For example, longitudinal online panels in which participants allow researchers to track their web browsing behaviour and link these traces to their survey answers will not only facilitate substantive research on societal questions but also enable methodological research (for example, on the quality of different data sources and measurement models), and contribute to the reproducibility of computational social science research.

Second, best practices and scientific infrastructures are needed for supporting the development, evaluation and re-use of measurements and the critical reflection on potentially harmful consequences of measurements 20 . Social scientists have developed such best practices and infrastructural support for survey measurements to avoid using instruments for which the validity is unclear or even questionable, and to support the re-usability of survey scales. I believe that practices from survey methodology and other domains, such as the medical industry, can inform our thinking here.

Finally, the fusion of algorithmic and human behaviour invites us to rethink the various ways in which data, measurements and social theories can be connected 20 . For example, product recommendations that users receive are based on measurements of users’ interests and needs: however, users and measurements are not only influenced by those recommendations, but also influence them in turn. As a community we need to develop research designs and environments that help us to systematically enhance our understanding of those feedback loops.

Claudia Wagner is Head of Computational Social Science Department at GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Köln, Germany; Professor for Applied Computational Social Sciences at RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany; and External Faculty Member of the Complexity Science Hub, Vienna, Austria .

Criminology

Daniel S. Nagin

Disciplinary silos in path-breaking science are disappearing. Criminology has had a longstanding tradition of interdisciplinarity, but mostly in the form of an uneasy truce of research from different disciplines appearing side-by-side in leading journals — a scholarly form of parallel play. In the future, this must change because the big unsolved challenges in criminology will require cooperation among all of the social and behavioural sciences.

These challenges include formally merging the macro-level themes emphasized by sociologists with the micro-, individual-level themes emphasized by psychologists and economists. Initial steps have been made by economists who apply game theory to model crime-relevant social interactions, but much remains to be done in building models that explain the formation and destruction of social trust, collective efficacy and norms, as they relate to legal definitions of criminal behaviour.

A second opportunity concerns the longstanding focus of criminology on crimes involving the physical taking of property and interpersonal physical violence. These crimes are still with us, but — as the daily news regularly reports — the internet has opened up broad new frontiers for crime that allow for thefts of property and identities at a distance, forms of extortion and human trafficking at a massive scale (often involving untraceable transactions using financial vehicles such as bitcoin) and interpersonal violence without physical contact. This is a new and largely unexplored frontier for criminological research that criminologists should dive into in collaboration with computer scientists who already are beginning to troll these virgin scholarly waters.

The final opportunity I will note also involves drawing from computer science, the primary home of what has come to be called machine learning. It is important that new generations of criminologists become proficient with machine learning methods and also collaborate with its creators. Machine learning and related statistical methods have wide applicability in both the traditional domains of criminological research and new frontiers. These include the use of prediction tools in criminal justice decision-making, which can aid in crime detection, and the prevention and measuring of crime both online and offline, but also have important implications for equity and fairness due to their consequential nature.

Daniel S. Nagin is Teresa and H. John Heinz III University Professor of Public Policy and Statistics at the Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA .

Behavioural economics

Bertil Tungodden

Behavioural and experimental economics have transformed the field of economics by integrating irrationality and nonselfish motivation in the study of human behaviour and social interaction. A richer foundation of human behaviour has opened many new exciting research avenues, and I here highlight three that I find particularly promising.

Economists have typically assumed that preferences are fixed and stable, but a growing literature, combining field and laboratory experimental approaches, has provided novel evidence on how the social environment shapes our moral and selfish preferences. It has been shown that prosocial role models make people less selfish 21 , that early-childhood education affects the fairness views of children 22 and that grit can be fostered in the correct classroom environment 23 . Such insights are important for understanding how exposure to different institutions and socialization processes influence the intergenerational transmission of preferences, but much more work is needed to gain systematic and robust evidence on the malleability of the many dimensions that shape human behaviour.

The moral mind is an important determinant of human behaviour, but our understanding of the complexity of moral motivation is still in its infancy. A growing literature, using an impartial spectator design in which study participants make consequential choices for others, has shown that people often disagree on what is morally acceptable. An important example is how people differ in their view of what is a fair inequality, ranging from the libertarian fairness view to the strict egalitarian fairness view 24 , 25 . An exciting question for future research is whether such moral differences reflect a concern for other moral values, such as freedom, or irrational considerations.

A third exciting development in behavioural and experimental economics is the growing set of global studies on the foundations of human behaviour 26 , 27 . It speaks to the major concern in the social sciences that our evidence is unrepresentative and largely based on studies with samples from Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic societies 28 . The increased availability of infrastructure for implementing large-scale experimental data collections and methodological advances carry promise that behavioural and experimental economic research will broaden our understanding of the foundations of human behaviour in the coming years.

Bertil Tungodden is Professor and Scientific Director of the Centre of Excellence FAIR at NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway .

Development economics

Esther Duflo

The past three decades have been a wonderful time for development economics. The number of scholars, the number of publications and the visibility of the work has dramatically increased. Development economists think about education, health, firm growth, mental health, climate, democratic rules and much more. No topic seems off limits!

This progress is intimately connected with the explosion of the use of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and, more generally, with the embrace of careful causal identification. RCTs have markedly transformed development economics and made it the field that it is today.

The past three decades (until the COVID-19 crisis) have also been very good for improving the circumstances of low-income people around the world: poverty rates have fallen; school enrolment has increased; and maternal and infant mortality has been halved. Although I would not dare imply that the two trends are causally related, one of the reasons for these improvements in the quality of life — even in countries where economic growth has been slow — is the greater focus on pragmatic solutions to the fundamental problems faced by people with few resources. In many countries, development economics researchers (particularly those working with RCTs) have been closely involved with policy-makers, helping them to develop, implement and test these solutions. In turn, this involvement has been a fertile ground for new questions, which have enriched the field.

I imagine future change will, once again, come from an unexpected place. One possible driver of innovation will come from this meeting between the requirements of policy and the intellectual ambition of researchers. This means that the new challenges of our planet must (and will) become the new challenges of development economics. Those challenges are, I believe, quite clear: rethinking social protection to be better prepared to face risks such as the COVID-19 pandemic; mitigating, but unfortunately also adapting to, climate changes; curbing pollution; and addressing gender, racial and ethnic inequality.

To address these critical issues, I believe the field will continue to rely on RCTs, but also start using more creatively (descriptively or in combination with RCTs) the huge amount of data that is increasingly available as governments, even in poor countries, digitize their operations. I cannot wait to be surprised by what comes next.

Esther Duflo is The Abdul Latif Jameel Professor of Poverty Alleviation and Development Economics at the Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA, USA; and cofounder and codirector of the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) .

Political science

Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier

Political science remains one of the most pluralistic disciplines and we are on the move towards engaged pluralism. This takes us beyond mere tolerance to true, sincere engagement across methods, methodologies, theories and even disciplinary boundaries. Engaged pluralism means doing the hard work of understanding our own research from the multiple perspectives of others.

More data are being collected on human behaviour than ever before and our advances in methods better address the inherent interdependencies of the data across time, space and context. There are new ways to measure human behaviour via text, image and video. Data creation can even go back in time. All these advancements bode well for the potential to better understand and predict behaviour. This ‘data century’ and ‘golden age of methods’ also hold the promise to bridge, not divide, political science, provided that there is engaged methodological pluralism. Qualitative methods provide unique insights and perspectives when joined with quantitative methods, as does a broader conception of the methodologies underlying and launching our research.

I remain a strong proponent of leveraging dynamics and focusing on heterogeneity in our research questions to advance our disciplines. Doing so brings in an explicit perspective of comparison around similarity and difference. Our questions, hypotheses and theories are often made more compelling when considering the dynamics and heterogeneity that emerges when thinking about time and change.

Striving for a better understanding of gender, race and ethnicity is driving deeper and fuller understandings of central questions in the social sciences. The diversity of the research teams themselves across gender, sex, race, ethnicity, first-generation status, religion, ideology, partisanship and cultures also pushes advancement. One area that we need to better support is career diversity. Supporting careers in government, non-profit organizations and industry, as well as academia, for graduate students will enhance our disciplines and accelerate the production of knowledge that changes the world.

Engaged pluralism remains a foundational key to advancement in political science. Engaged pluralism supports critical diversity, equity and inclusion work, strengthens political scientists’ commitment to democratic principles, and encourages civic engagement more broadly. It is an exciting time to be a social scientist.

Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier is Vernal Riffe Professor of Political Science, Professor of Sociology (courtesy) and Distinguished University Professor at the Department of Political Science, Ohio State University, Columbus OH, USA; and immediate past President of the American Political Science Association .

Cognitive psychology

Andrew Perfors

Cognitive psychology excels at understanding questions whose problem-space is well-defined, with precisely specified theories that transparently map onto thoroughly explored experimental paradigms. That means there is a vast gulf between the current state of the art and the richness and complexity of cognition in the real world. The most exciting open questions are about how to bridge that gap without sacrificing rigour and precision. This requires at least three changes.

First, we must move beyond typical experiments. Stimuli must become less artificial, with a naturalistic structure and distribution. Similarly, tasks must become more ecologically valid: less isolated, with more uncertainty, embedded in natural situations and over different time-scales.

Second, we must move beyond considering individuals in isolation. We live in a rich social world and an environment that is heavily shaped by other humans. How we think, learn and act is deeply affected by how other people think and interact with us; cognitive science needs to engage with this more.

Third, we must move beyond the metaphor of humans as computers. Our cognition is deeply intertwined with our emotions, motivations and senses. These are more than just parameters in our minds; they have a complexity and logic of their own, and interact in nontrivial ways with each other and more typical cognitive domains such as learning, reasoning and acting.

How do we make progress on these steps? We need reliable real-world data that are comparable across people and situations, reflect the cognitive processes involved and are not changed by measurement. Technology may help us with this, but challenges surrounding privacy and data quality are huge. Our models and analytic approaches must also grow in complexity — commensurate with the growth in problem and data complexity — without becoming intractable or losing their explanatory power.

Success in this endeavour calls for a different kind of science that is not centred around individual laboratories or small stand-alone projects. The biggest advances will be achieved on the basis of large, rich, real-world datasets from different populations, created and analysed in collaborative teams that span multiple domains, fields and approaches. This requires incentive structures that reward team-focused, slower science and prioritize the systematic construction of reliable knowledge over splashy findings.

Andrew Perfors is Associate Professor and Deputy Director of the Complex Human Data Hub, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .

Cultural and social psychology

Ying-yi Hong

I am writing this at an exceptional moment in human history. For two years, the world has faced the COVID-19 pandemic and there is no end in sight. Cultural and social psychology are uniquely equipped to understand the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically examining how people, communities and countries are dealing with this extreme global crisis — especially at a time when many parts of the world are already experiencing geopolitical upheaval.

During the pandemic, and across different nations and regions, a diverse set of strategies (and subsequent levels of effectiveness) were used to curb the spread of the disease. In the first year of the pandemic, research revealed that some cultural worldviews — such as collectivism (versus individualism) and tight (versus loose) norms — were positively associated with compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures as well as with fewer infections and deaths 29 , 30 . These worldview differences arguably stem from different perspectives on abiding to social norms and prioritizing the collective welfare over an individual’s autonomy and liberty. Although in the short term it seems that a collectivist or tight worldview has been advantageous, it is unclear whether this will remain the case in the long term. Cultural worldviews are ‘tools’ that individuals use to decipher the meaning of their environment, and are dynamic rather than static 31 . Future research can examine how cultural worldviews and global threats co-evolve.

The pandemic has also amplified the demarcation of national, political and other major social categories. On the one hand, identification with some groups (for example, national identity) was found to increase in-group care and thus a greater willingness to sacrifice personal autonomy to comply with COVID-19 measures 32 . On the other hand, identification with other groups (for example, political parties) widened the ideological divide between groups and drove opposing behaviours towards COVID-19 measures and health outcomes 33 . As we are facing climate change and other pressing global challenges, understanding the role of social identities and how they affect worldviews, cognition and behaviour will be vital. How can we foster more inclusive (versus exclusive) identities that can unite rather than divide people and nations?

Ying-yi Hong is Choh-Ming Li Professor of Management and Associate Dean (Research) at the Department of Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China .

Developmental psychology

Alison Gopnik

Developmental psychology is similar to the kind of book or band that, paradoxically, everyone agrees is underrated. On the one hand, children and the people who care for them are often undervalued and overlooked. On the other, since Piaget, developmental research has tackled some of the most profound philosophical questions about every kind of human behaviour. This will only continue into the future.

Psychologists increasingly recognize that the minds of children are not just a waystation or an incomplete version of adult minds. Instead, childhood is a distinct evolutionarily adaptive phase of an organism, with its own characteristic cognitions, emotions and motivations. These characteristics of childhood reflect a different agenda than those of the adult mind — a drive to explore rather than exploit. This drive comes with motivations such as curiosity, emotions such as wonder and surprise and remarkable cognitive learning capacities. A new flood of research on curiosity, for example, shows that children actively seek out the information that will help them to learn the most.

The example of curiosity also reflects the exciting prospects for interdisciplinary developmental science. Machine learning is increasingly using children’s learning as a model, and developmental psychologists are developing more precise models as a result. Curiosity-based AI can illuminate both human and machine intelligence. Collaborations with biology are also exciting: for example, in work on evolutionary ‘life history’ explanations of the effects of adverse experiences on later life, and new research on plasticity and sensitive periods in neuroscience. Finally, children are at the cutting edge of culture, and developmental psychologists increasingly conduct a much wider range of cross-cultural studies.

But perhaps the most important development is that policy-makers are finally starting to realize just how crucial children are to important social issues. Developmental science has shown that providing children with the care that they need can decrease poverty, inequality, disease and violence. But that care has been largely invisible to policy-makers and politicians. Understanding scientifically how caregiving works and how to support it more effectively will be the most important challenge for developmental psychology in the next century.

Alison Gopnik is Professor of Psychology and Affiliate Professor of Philosophy at the Department of Psychology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA .

Science of science

Cassidy R. Sugimoto

Why study science? The goal of science is to advance knowledge to improve the human condition. It is, therefore, essential that we understand how science operates to maximize efficiency and social good. The metasciences are fields that are devoted to understanding the scientific enterprise. These fields are distinguished by differing epistemologies embedded in their names: the philosophy, history and sociology of science represent canonical metasciences that use theories and methods from their mother disciplines. The ‘science of science’ uses empirical approaches to understand the mechanisms of science. As mid-twentieth-century science historian Derek de Solla Price observed, science of science allows us to “turn the tools of science on science itself” 34 .

Contemporary questions in the science of science investigate, inter alia, catalysts of discovery and innovation, consequences of increased access to scientific information, role of teams in knowledge creation and the implications of social stratification on the scientific enterprise. Investigation of these issues require triangulation of data and integration across the metasciences, to generate robust theories, model on valid assumptions and interpret results appropriately. Community-owned infrastructure and collective venues for communication are essential to achieve these goals. The construction of large-scale science observatories, for example, would provide an opportunity to capture the rapidly expanding dataverse, collaborate and share data, and provide nimble translations of data into information for policy-makers and the scientific community.

The topical foci of the field are also undergoing rapid transformation. The expansion of datasets enables researchers to analyse a fuller population, rather than a narrow sample that favours particular communities. The field has moved from an elitist focus on ‘success’ and ‘impact’ to a more-inclusive and prosopographical perspective. Conversations have shifted from citations, impact factors and h -indices towards responsible indicators, diversity and broader impacts. Instead of asking ‘how can we predict the next Nobel prize winner?’, we can ask ‘what are the consequences of attrition in the scientific workforce?’. The turn towards contextualized measurements that use more inclusive datasets to understand the entire system of science places the science of science in a ripe position to inform policy and propel us towards a more innovative and equitable future.

Cassidy R. Sugimoto is Professor and Tom and Marie Patton School Chair, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA .

Sari Hanafi

In the past few years, we have been living through times in which reasonable debate has become impossible. Demagogical times are driven by the vertiginous rise of populism and authoritarianism, which we saw in the triumph of Donald Trump in the USA and numerous other populist or authoritarian leaders in many places around the globe. There are some pressing tasks for sociology that can be, in brief, reduced to three.

First, fostering democracy and the democratization process requires disentangling the constitutive values that compose the liberal political project (personal liberty, equality, moral autonomy and multiculturalism) to address the question of social justice and to accommodate the surge in people’s religiosity in many parts in the globe.

Second, the struggle for the environment is inseparable from our choice of political economy, and from the nature of our desired economic system — and these connections between human beings and nature have never been as intimate as they are now. Past decades saw rapid growth that was based on assumptions of the long-term stability of the fixed costs of raw materials and energy. But this is no longer the case. More recently, financial speculation intensified and profits shrunk, generating distributional conflicts between workers, management, owners and tax authorities. The nature of our economic system is now in acute crisis.

The answer lies in a consciously slow-growing new economy that incorporates the biophysical foundations of economics into its functioning mechanisms. Society and nature cannot continue to be perceived each as differentiated into separate compartments. The spheres of nature, culture, politics, social, economy and religion are indeed traversed by common logics that allow a given society to be encompassed in its totality, exactly as Marcel Mauss 35 did. The logic of power and interests embodied in ‘ Homo economicus ’ prevents us from being able to see the potentiality of human beings to cultivate gift-giving practices as an anthropological foundation innate within social relationships.

Third, there are serious social effects of digitalized forms of labour and the trend of replacing labour with an automaton. Even if digital labour partially reduces the unemployment rate, the lack of social protection for digital labourers would have tremendous effects on future generations.

In brief, it is time to connect sociology to moral and political philosophy to address fundamentally post-COVID-19 challenges.

Sari Hanafi is Professor of Sociology at the American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; and President of the International Sociological Association .

Environmental studies (climate change)

Yasuko Kameyama

Climate change has been discussed for more than 40 years as a multilateral issue that poses a great threat to humankind and ecosystems. Unfortunately, we are still talking about the same issue today. Why can’t we solve this problem, even though scientists pointed out its importance and urgency so many years ago?

These past years have been spent trying to prove the causal relationship between an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations, global temperature rise and various extreme weather events, as well as developing and disseminating technologies needed to reduce emissions. All of these tasks have been handled by experts in the field. At the same time, the general public invested little time in this movement, probably expecting that the problem would be solved by experts and policy-makers. But that has not been the case. No matter how much scientists have emphasized the crisis of climate change or how many clean energy technologies engineers have developed, society has resisted making the necessary changes. Now, the chances of keeping the temperature rise within 1.5 °C of pre-industrial levels — the goal necessary to minimize the effects of climate change — are diminishing.

We seem to finally be realizing the importance of social scientific knowledge. People need to take scientific information seriously for clean technology to be quickly diffused. Companies are more interested in investing in newer technology and product development when they know that their products will sell. Because environmental problems are caused by human activity, research on human behaviour is indispensable in solving these problems.

Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have not devoted many pages to the areas of human awareness and behaviour ( https://www.ipcc.ch/ ). The IPCC’s Third Working Group, which deals with mitigation measures, has partially spotlighted research on institutions, as well as on concepts such as fairness. People’s perception of climate change and the relationship between perception and behavioural change differ depending on the country, societal structure and culture. Additional studies in these areas are required and, for that purpose, more studies from regions such as Asia, Africa and South America, which are underrepresented in terms of the number of academic publications, are particularly needed.

Yasuko Kameyama is Director, Social Systems Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan .

Sustainability (food systems)

Mario Herrero

The food system is in dire straits. Food demand is unprecedented, while malnutrition in all its forms (obesity, undernutrition and micronutrient deficiencies) is rampant. Environmental degradation is pervasive and increasing, and if it continues, the comfort zone for humanity and ecosystems to thrive will be seriously compromised. From bruises and shapes to sell-by dates, we tend to find many reasons to exclude perfectly edible food from our plates, whereas in other cases not enough food reaches hungry mouths owing to farming methods, pests and lack of adequate storage. These types of inequalities are common and — together with inherent perverse incentives that maintain the status quo of how we produce, consume and waste increasingly cheap and processed food — they are launching us towards a disaster.

We are banking on a substantial transformation of the food system to solve this conundrum. Modifying food consumption and waste patterns are central to the plan for achieving healthier diets, while increasing the sustainability of our food system. This is also an attractive policy proposition, as it could lead to gains in several sectors. Noncommunicable diseases such as obesity, diabetes and heart disease could decline, while reducing the effects of climate change, deforestation, excessive water withdrawals and biodiversity loss, and their enormous associated — and largely unaccounted — costs.

Modifying our food consumption and waste patterns is very hard, and unfortunately we know very little about how to change them at scale. Yes, many pilots and small examples exist on pricing, procurement, food environments and others, but the evidence is scarce, and the magnitude of the change required demands an unprecedented transdisciplinary research agenda. The problem is at the centre of human agency and behaviour, embodying culture, habits, values, social status, economics and all aspects of agri-food systems. Certainly, one of the big research areas for the next decade if we are to reach the Sustainable Development Goals leaving no one behind.

Mario Herrero is Professor, Cornell Atkinson scholar and Nancy and Peter Meinig Family Investigator in the Life Sciences at the Department of Global Development, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA .

Cultural evolution

Laurel Fogarty

Humans are the ultimate ‘cultural animals’. We are innovative, pass our cultures to one another across generations and build vast self-constructed environments that reflect our cultural biases. We achieve things using our cultural capacities that are unimaginable for any other species on earth. And yet we have only begun to understand the dynamics of cultural change, the drivers of cultural complexity or the ways that we adapt culturally to changing environments. Scholars — anthropologists, archaeologists and sociologists — have long studied culture, aiming to describe and understand its staggering diversity. The relatively new field of cultural evolution has different aims, one of the most important of which is to understand the mechanics in the background — what general principles, if any, govern human cultural change?

Although the analogy of culture as an evolutionary process has been made since at least the time of Darwin 36 , 37 , cultural evolution as a robust field of study is much younger. From its beginnings with the pioneering work of Cavalli-Sforza & Feldman 38 , 39 , 40 and Boyd & Richerson 41 , 42 , the field of cultural evolution has been heavily theoretical. It has drawn on models from genetic evolution 40 , 43 , 44 , 45 , ecology 46 , 47 and epidemiology 40 , 48 , extending and adapting them to account for unique and important aspects of cultural transmission. Indeed, in its short life, the field of cultural evolution has largely been dominated by a growing body of theory that ensured that the fledgling field started out on solid foundations. Because it underpins and makes possible novel applications of cultural evolutionary ideas, theoretical cultural evolution’s continued development is not only crucial to the field’s growth but also represents some of its most exciting future work.

One of the most urgent tasks for cultural evolution researchers in the next five years is to develop, alongside its theoretical foundations, robust principles of application 49 , 50 , 51 . In other words, it is vital to develop our understanding of what we can — and, crucially, cannot — infer from different types of cultural data. Where do we draw those boundaries and how can we apply cultural evolutionary theory to cultural datasets in a principled way? The tandem development of robust theory and principled application has the potential to strengthen cultural evolution as a robust, useful and ground-breaking inferential science of human behaviour.

Laurel Fogarty is Senior Scientist at the Department of Human Behaviour, Ecology, and Culture, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany .

Over the past decade, research using molecular genetic data has confirmed one of the main conclusions of twin studies: all human behaviour is partly heritable 52 , 53 . Attempts at examining the link between genetics and behaviour have been met with concerns that the findings can be abused to justify discrimination — and there are good historical grounds for these concerns. However, these findings also show that ignoring the contribution of genes to variation in human behaviour could be detrimental to a complete understanding of social phenomena, given the complex ways that genes and environment interact.

Uncovering these complex pathways has become feasible only recently thanks to rapid technological progress reducing the costs of genotyping. Sample sizes in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have risen from tens of thousands to millions in the past decade, reporting thousands of genetic variants associated with different behaviours 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 . New ways to use GWAS results have emerged, the most important one arguably being a method to aggregate the additive effects of many genetic variants into a ‘polygenic index’ (PGI) (also known as a ‘polygenic score’) that summarizes an individual’s genetic propensity towards a trait or behaviour 58 , 59 . Being aggregate measures, PGIs capture a much larger share of the variance in the trait of interest compared to individual genetic variants 60 . Thus, they have paved the way for follow-up studies with smaller sample sizes but deeper phenotyping compared to the original GWAS, allowing researchers to, for example, analyse the channels through which genes operate 61 , 62 , how they interact with the environment 63 , 64 , and account for confounding bias and boost statistical power by controlling for genetic effects 65 , 66 .

Useful as they are, PGIs and the GWAS that they are based on can suffer from confounding due to environmental factors that correlate with genotypes, such as population stratification, indirect effect from relatives or assortative mating 67 . Now that the availability of genetic data enables large-scale within-family GWAS, the next big thing in behaviour genetic research will be disentangling these sources 68 . While carrying the progress further, it is important that the field prioritizes moving away from its currently predominant Eurocentric bias by extending data collection and analyses to individuals of non-European ancestries, as the exclusion of non-European ancestries from genetic research has the potential to exacerbate health disparities 69 . Researchers should also be careful to communicate their findings clearly and responsibly to the public and guard against their misappropriation by attempts to fuel discriminatory action and discourse 70 .

Aysu Okbay is Assistant Professor at the Department of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands .

Cognitive neuroscience

Anna C. Nobre

Since the ‘decade of the brain’ in the 1990s, ingenuity in cognitive neuroscience has focused on measuring and analysing brain signals. Adapting tools from statistics, engineering, computer science, physics and other disciplines, we studied activity, states, connectivity, interactions, time courses and dynamics in brain regions and networks. Unexpected findings about the brain yielded important insights about the mind.

Now is a propitious time to upgrade the brain–mind duumvirate to a brain–mind–behaviour triumvirate. Brain and mind are embodied, and their workings are expressed through various effectors. Yet, experimental tasks typically use simple responses to capture complex psychological functions. Often, a button press — with its limited dimensions of latency and accuracy — measures anticipating, focusing, evaluating, choosing, reflecting or remembering. Researchers venturing beyond such simple responses are uncovering how the contents of mind can be studied using various continuous measures, such as pupil diameter, gaze shifts and movement trajectories.

Most tasks also restrict participants’ movements to ensure experimental control. However, we are learning that principles of cognition derived in artificial laboratory contexts can fail to generalize to natural behaviour. Virtual reality should prove a powerful methodology. Participants can behave naturally, and experimenters can control stimulation and obtain quality measures of gaze, hand and body movements. Noninvasive neurophysiology methods are becoming increasingly portable. Exciting immersive brain–mind–behaviour studies are just ahead.

The next necessary step is out of the academic bubble. Today the richest data on human behaviour belong to the information and technology industries. In our routines, we contribute data streams through telephones, keyboards, watches, vehicles and countless smart devices in the internet of things. These expose properties such as processing speed, fluency, attention, dexterity, navigation and social context. We supplement these by broadcasting feelings, attitudes and opinions through social media and other forums. The richness and scale of the resulting big data offer unprecedented opportunities for deriving predictive patterns that are relevant to understanding human cognition (and its disorders). The outcomes can then guide further hypothesis-driven experimentation. Cognitive neuroscience is intrinsically collaborative, combining a broad spectrum of disciplines to study the mind. Its challenge now is to move from a multidisciplinary to a multi-enterprise science.

Anna C. Nobre is Chair in Translational Cognitive Neuroscience at the Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK; and Director of Oxford Centre for Human Brain Activity, Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, UK .

Social and affective neuroscience

Tatia M. C. Lee

Social and affective neuroscience is a relatively new, but rapidly developing, field of neuroscience. Social and affective neuroscience research takes a multilevel approach to make sense of socioaffective processes, focusing on macro- (for example, social environments and structures), meso- (for example, social interactions) and micro (for example, socio-affective neural processes and perceptions)-level interactions. Because the products of these interactions are person-specific, the conventional application of group-averaged mechanisms to understand the brain in a socioemotional context has been reconsidered. Researchers turn to ecologically valid stimuli (for example, dynamic and virtual reality instead of static stimuli) and experimental settings (for example, real-time social interaction) 71 to address interindividual differences in social and affective responses. At the neural level, there has been a shift of research focus from local neural activations to large-scale synchronized interactions across neural networks. Network science contributes to the understanding of dynamic changes of neural processes that reflect the interactions and interconnection of neural structures that underpin social and affective processes.

We are living in an ever-changing socioaffective world, full of unexpected challenges. The ageing population and an increasing prevalence of depression are social phenomena on a global scale. Social isolation and loneliness caused by measures to tackle the current pandemic affect physical and psychological well-being of people from all walks of life. These global issues require timely research efforts to generate potential solutions. In this regard, social and affective neuroscience research using computational modelling, longitudinal research designs and multimodal data integration will create knowledge about the basis of adaptive and maladaptive social and affective neurobehavioural processes and responses 72 , 73 , 74 . Such knowledge offers important insights into the precise delineation of brain–symptom relationships, and hence the development of prediction models of cognitive and socioaffective functioning (for example, refs. 75 , 76 ). Therefore, screening tools for identifying potential vulnerabilities can be developed, and timely and precise interventions can be tailored to meet individual situations and needs. The translational application of social and affective neuroscience research to precision medicine (and policy) is experiencing unprecedented demand, and such demand is met with unprecedented clinical and research capabilities.

Tatia M. C. Lee is Chair Professor of Psychology at the State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Laboratory of Neuropsychology and Human Neuroscience, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China .

Maurizio Corbetta

Focal brain disorders, including stroke, trauma and epilepsy, are the main causes of disability and loss of productivity in the world, and carry a cumulative cost in Europe of about € 500 billion per year 77 . The disease process affects a specific circuit in the brain by turning it off (as in stroke) or pathologically turning it on (as in epilepsy). The cause of the disabling symptoms is typically local circuit damage. However, there is now overwhelming evidence that symptoms reflect not only local pathology but also widespread (network) functional abnormalities. For instance, in stroke, an average lesion — the size of a golf ball — typically alters the activity of on average 25% of all brain connections. Furthermore, normalization of these abnormalities correlates with optimal recovery of function 78 , 79 .

One exciting treatment opportunity is ‘circuit-based’ stimulation: an ensemble of methods (optogenetic, photoacoustic, electrochemical, magnetic and electrical) that have the potential to normalize activity. Presently, this type of therapy is limited by numerous factors, including a lack of knowledge about the circuits, the difficulty of mapping these circuits in single patients and, most importantly, a principled understanding of where and how to stimulate to produce functional recovery.

A possible solution lies in a strategy (developed with G. Deco, M. Massimini and M. Sanchez-Vivez) that starts with an in-depth assessment of behaviour and physiological studies of brain activity to characterize the affected circuits and associated patterns of functional abnormalities. Such a multi-dimensional physiological map of a lesioned brain can be then fed to biologically realistic in silico models 80 . A model of a lesioned brain affords the opportunity to explore, in an exhaustive way, different kinds of stimulation to normalize faulty activity. Once a suitable protocol is found it can be exported first to animal models, and then to humans. Stimulation alone will not be enough. Pairing with behavioural training (rehabilitation) will stabilize learning and normalize connections.

The ability to interface therapy (stimulation, rehabilitation and drugs) with brain signals or other kinds of behavioural sensor offers another exciting opportunity, to open the ‘brain’s black box’. Most current treatments in neuroscience are given with no regard to their effect on the underlying brain signals or behaviour. Giving patients conscious access to their own brain signals may substantially enhance recovery, as the brain is now in the position to use its own powerful connections and learning mechanisms to cure itself.

Maurizio Corbetta is Professor and Chair of Neurology at the Department of Neuroscience and Director of the Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, Italy; and Principal Investigator at the Venetian Institute of Molecular Medicine (VIMM), Padova, Italy .

Merete Nordentoft

Schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders are among the costliest and most debilitating disorders in terms of personal sufferings for those affected, for relatives and for society 81 . These disorders often require long-term treatment and, for a substantial proportion of the patients, the outcomes are poor. This has motivated efforts to prevent long-lasting illness by early intervention. The time around the onset of psychotic disorders is associated with an increased risk of suicide, of loss of affiliation with the labour market, and social isolation and exclusion. Therefore, prevention and treatment of first-episode psychosis will be a key challenge for the future.

There is now solid evidence proving that early intervention services can improve clinical outcomes 82 . This was first demonstrated in the large Danish OPUS trial, in which OPUS treatment — consisting of assertive outreach, case management and family involvement, provided by multidisciplinary teams over a two-year period — was shown to improve clinical outcomes 83 . Moreover, it was also cost-effective 84 . Although the positive effects on clinical outcomes were not sustainable after five and ten years, there was a long-lasting effect on use of supported housing facilities (indicating improved ability to live independently) 85 . Later trials proved that it is possible to maintain the positive clinical outcomes by extending the services to five years or by offering a stepped care model with continued intensive care for the patients who are most impaired 86 . However, even though both clinical and functional outcomes (such as labour market affiliation) can be improved by evidence-based treatments 82 , a large group of patients with first-episode psychosis still have psychotic symptoms after ten years. Thus, there is still an urgent need for identification of new and better options for treatment.

Most probably, some of the disease processes start long before first onset of a psychotic disorder. Thus, identifying disease mechanisms and possibilities for intervention before onset of psychosis will be extremely valuable. Evidence for effective preventive interventions is very limited, and the most burning question — of how to prevent psychosis — is still open.

The early intervention approach is also promising also for other disorders, including bipolar affective disorder, depression, anxiety, eating disorders, personality disorders, autism and attention-deficient hyperactivity disorder.

Merete Nordentoft is Clinical Professor at the Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; and Principal Investigator, CORE - Copenhagen Research Centre for Mental Health, Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark .

Epidemiology

Gabriel M. Leung

In a widely anthologized article from the business field of marketing, Levitt 87 pointed out that often industries failed to grow because they suffered from a limited market view. For example, Kodak went bust because it narrowly defined itself as a film camera company for still photography rather than one that should have been about imaging writ large. If it had had that strategic insight, it would have exploited and invested in digital technologies aggressively and perhaps gone down the rather more successful path of Fujifilm — or even developed into territory now cornered by Netflix.

The raison d’être of epidemiology has been to provide a set of robust scientific methods that underpin public health practice. In turn, the field of public health has expanded to fulfil the much-wider and more-intensive demands of protecting, maintaining and promoting the health of local and global populations, intergenerationally. At its broadest, the mission of public health should be to advance social justice towards a complete state of health.

Therefore, epidemiologists should continue to recruit and embrace relevant methodology sets that could answer public health questions, better and more efficiently. For instance, Davey Smith and Ebrahim 88 described how epidemiology adapted instrumental variable analysis that had been widely deployed in econometrics to fundamentally improve causal inference in observational epidemiology. Conversely, economists have not been shy in adopting the randomized controlled trial design to answer questions of development, and have recognized it with a Nobel prize 89 . COVID-19 has brought mathematical epidemiology or modelling to the fore. The foundations of the field borrowed heavily from population dynamics and ecological theory.

In future, classical epidemiology, which has mostly focused on studying how the exposome associates with the phenome, needs to take into simultaneous account the other layers of the multiomics universe — from the genome to the metabolome to the microbiome 90 . Another area requiring innovative thinking concerns how to harness big data to better understand human behaviour 91 . Finally, we must consider key questions that are amenable to epidemiologic investigation arising from the major global health challenges: climate change, harmful addictions and mental wellness. What new methodological tools do we need to answer these questions?

Epidemiologists must keep trying on new lenses that correct our own siloed myopia.

Gabriel M. Leung is Helen and Francis Zimmern Professor in Population Health at WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong; Chief Scientific Officer at Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health, Hong Kong Science and Technology Park; and Dean of Medicine at the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China .

Bahdanau, D., Cho, K. & Bengio, Y. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0473 (2014).

Jumper, J. et al. Nature 596 , 583–589 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Dwork, C., Hardt, M., Pitassi, T., Reingold, O. & Zemel, R. Fairness through awareness. In Proc. 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference , 214–226 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2012).

Chouldechova, A. & Roth, A. Commun. ACM 63 , 82–89 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Hara, K. et al. A data-driven analysis of workers’ earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turk. In Proc. 2018 CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 1–14 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2018).

Strubell, E., Ganesh, A. & McCallum, A. Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02243 (2019).

Rival, L. Anthropol. Today 37 , 9–12 (2021).

Carey, J. W. Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society (Unwin Hyman, 1985).

Williams, R. Television: Technology and Cultural Form (Fontana, 1974).

Helmond, A. Soc. Media Soc . 1 , https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603080 (2015).

Rambukkana, N. (Ed.). Hashtag Publics: The Power and Politics of Discursive Networks (Peter Lang, 2015).

Burrell, J. Big Data Soc. 3 , 1–12 (2016).

Bruns, A. et al. Facebook shuts the gate after the horse has bolted, and hurts real research in the process. Internet Policy Review , https://go.nature.com/3IP2xYr (25 April 2018).

Article 19. EU: Stop platforms from suppressing public interest research. article.19.org , https://go.nature.com/3DTWgXT (13 September 2021).

Burgess, J. et al. Critical simulation as hybrid digital method for exploring the data operations and vernacular cultures of visual social media platforms. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/2cwsu (2021).

Rieder, B. & Hofmann, J. Internet Policy Review 9 , 1–28 (2020).

Vosoughi, S., Roy, D. & Aral, S. Science 359 , 1146–1151 (2018).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hussein, E., Juneja, P. & Mitra, T. Measuring misinformation in video search platforms: an audit study on YouTube. In Proc. of the ACM on Human–Computer Interaction 4 (CSCW1) (eds. Lampe C. et al.) 1–27 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2020).

Lazer, D. M. J. et al. Science 369 , 1060–1062 (2020).

Wagner, C. et al. Nature 595 , 197–204 (2021).

Kosse, F., Deckers, T., Pinger, P., Schildberg-Hörisch, H. & Falk, A. J. Polit. Econ. 128 , 434–467 (2020).

Cappelen, A., List, J., Samek, A. & Tungodden, B. J. Polit. Econ. 128 , 2739–2758 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Alan, S., Boneva, T. & Ertac, S. Q. J. Econ. 134 , 1121–1162 (2019).

Google Scholar  

Almås, I., Cappelen, A. & Tungodden, B. J. Polit. Econ. 128 , 1753–1788 (2020).

Müller, D. & Renes, S. Soc. Choice Welfare 56 , 679–711 (2021).

Falk, A. et al. Q. J. Econ. 133 , 1645–1692 (2018).

Almås, I., Cappelen, A., Sørensen, E. Ø. & Tungodden, B. Global evidence on the selfish rich inequality hypothesis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (in the press).

Henrich, J., Root, H. & Henrich, J. The WEIRDest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Propserous (Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, 2020).

Gelfand, M. J. et al. Lancet Planet. Health 5 , e135–e144 (2021).

Lu, J. G., Jin, P. & English, A. S. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2021793118 (2021).

Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y. & Benet-Martínez, V. Am. Psychol. 55 , 709–720 (2000).

Chan, H.-W. et al. Polit. Psychol. 42 , 767–793 (2021).

Gollwitzer, A. et al. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4 , 1186–1197 (2020).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

de Solla Price, D. Little Science, Big Science (Columbia Univ. Press, 1963).

Mauss, M. 1925. in Sociologie et Anthropologie (Réédition 1978) 143–275 (Presses Universitaires de France).

Darwin, C. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (Penguin 2004) (reprint of 2nd edn, 1879).

Mesoudi, A. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114 , 7853–7860 (2017).

Cavalli-Sforza, L. & Feldman, M. W. Theor. Popul. Biol. 4 , 42–55 (1973).

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. & Feldman, M. W. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 25 , 618–637 (1973).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. & Feldman, M. W. Cultural Transmission and Evolution (Princeton Univ. Press, 1981).

Richerson, P. J. & Boyd, R. J. Social Biological Syst. 1 , 127–154 (1978).

Boyd, R. & Richerson, P. J. Culture and the Evolutionary Process (Chicago Univ. Press, 1985).

Shennan, S. J. Camb. Archaeol. J. 11 , 5–16 (2001).

Strimling, P., Sjöstrand, J., Enquist, M. & Eriksson, K. Theor. Popul. Biol. 76 , 77–83 (2009).

Aoki, K., Lehmann, L. & Feldman, M. W. Theor. Popul. Biol. 79 , 192–202 (2011).

Kandler, A. & Laland, K. N. Theor. Popul. Biol. 76 , 59–67 (2009).

Laland, K. N. & O’Brien, M. J. Biol. Theory 6 , 191–202 (2011).

Richerson, P. J. & Boyd, R. Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution (Univ. Chicago Press, 2005).

Kandler, A. & Powell, A. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 373 , 20170056 (2018).

Kandler, A., Wilder, B. & Fortunato, L. R. Soc. Open Sci. 4 , 170949 (2017).

McElreath, R. et al. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 363 , 3515–3528 (2008).

Turkheimer, E. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 9 , 160–164 (2000).

Polderman, T. J. C. C. et al. Genet. 47 , 702–709 (2015).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Visscher, P. M. et al. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 101 , 5–22 (2017).

Karlsson Linnér, R. et al. Nat. Genet. 51 , 245–257 (2019).

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Lee, J. J. et al. Nat. Genet. 50 , 1112–1121 (2018).

Liu, M. et al. Nat. Genet. 51 , 237–244 (2019).

Wray, N. R., Goddard, M. E. & Visscher, P. M. Genome Res. 17 , 1520–1528 (2007).

The International Schizophrenia Consortium. Nature 460 , 748–752 (2009).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Becker, J. et al. Nat. Hum. Behav . (2021).

Belsky, D. W. et al. Psychol. Sci. 27 , 957–972 (2016).

Young, A. I., Benonisdottir, S., Przeworski, M. & Kong, A. Science 365 , 1396–1400 (2019).

Barcellos, S. H., Carvalho, L. S. & Turley, P. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , E9765–E9772 (2018).

Papageorge, N. W. & Thom, K. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 18 , 1351–1399 (2020).

DiPrete, T. A., Burik, C. A. P. & Koellinger, P. D. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , E4970–E4979 (2018).

Rietveld, C. A. et al. Science 340 , 1467–1471 (2013).

Kong, A., Benonisdottir, S. & Young, A. I. Family analysis with Mendelian imputations. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.02.185181 (2020).

Howe, L. J. et al. Within-sibship GWAS improve estimates of direct genetic effects. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.433935 (2021).

Martin, A. R. et al. Nat. Genet. 51 , 584–591 (2019).

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genetics and Human Behaviour: The Ethical Context (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2002).

Redcay, E. & Schilbach, L. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 20 , 495–505 (2019).

Roeckner, A. R., Oliver, K. I., Lebois, L. A. M., van Rooij, S. J. H. & Stevens, J. S. Transl. Psychiatry 11 , 508 (2021).

Sevgi, M., Diaconescu, A. O., Henco, L., Tittgemeyer, M. & Schilbach, L. Biol. Psychiatry 87 , 185–193 (2020).

Wittmann, M. K. et al. Neuron 91 , 482–493 (2016).

Gao, M. et al. Neuroimage 223 , 117290 (2020).

Lee, K. M., Ferreira-Santos, F. & Satpute, A. B. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 131 , 211–228 (2021).

Olesen, J., Gustavsson, A., Svensson, M., Wittchen, H. U. & Jönsson, B. Eur. J. Neurol. 19 , 155–162 (2012).

Corbetta, M., Siegel, J. S. & Shulman, G. L. Cortex 107 , 229–237 (2018).

Griffis, J. C., Metcalf, N. V., Corbetta, M. & Shulman, G. L. Cell Rep. 28 , 2527–2540 (2019).

Deco, G. et al. J. Neurosci. 33 , 11239–11252 (2013).

Patel, V. et al. Lancet 392 , 1553–1598 (2018).

Correll, C. U. et al. JAMA Psychiatry 75 , 555–565 (2018).

Petersen, L. et al. Br. Med. J. 331 , 602 (2005).

Hastrup, L. H. et al. Br. J. Psychiatry 202 , 35–41 (2013).

Secher, R. G. et al. Schizophr. Bull. 41 , 617–626 (2015).

Albert, N. et al. Br. Med. J. 356 , i6681 (2017).

Levitt, T. Harv. Bus. Rev. 38 , 45–56 (1960).

Davey Smith, G. & Ebrahim, S. Int. J. Epidemiol. 32 , 1–22 (2003).

Callaway, E. ‘Randomistas’ who used controlled trials to fight poverty win economics Nobel. Nature, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03125-y (14 October 2019).

Topol, E. J. Cell 157 , 241–253 (2014).

Subrahmanian, V. S. & Kumar, S. Science 355 , 489 (2017).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Political Science, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

School of Communication and Digital Media Research Centre (DMRC), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Department of Neuroscience and Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, Padova, Italy

Venetian Institute of Molecular Medicine (VIMM), Padova, Italy

Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Microsoft Research New York, New York, NY, USA

École Normale Supérieure, Paris, France

Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Department of Human Behavior, Ecology, and Culture, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany

Department of Psychology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon

Department of Global Development, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

Department of Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

Center for Social and Environmental Systems Research, Social Systems Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan

State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Laboratory of Neuropsychology and Human Neuroscience, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health, Hong Kong Science and Technology Park, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Oxford Centre for Human Brain Activity, Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

CORE - Copenhagen Research Centre for Mental Health, Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark

Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Department of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Complex Human Data Hub, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

ODID and SAME, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA

Centre of Excellence FAIR, NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway

GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Köln, Germany

RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

Complexity Science Hub Vienna, Vienna, Austria

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier , Jean Burgess , Maurizio Corbetta , Kate Crawford , Esther Duflo , Laurel Fogarty , Alison Gopnik , Sari Hanafi , Mario Herrero , Ying-yi Hong , Yasuko Kameyama , Tatia M. C. Lee , Gabriel M. Leung , Daniel S. Nagin , Anna C. Nobre , Merete Nordentoft , Aysu Okbay , Andrew Perfors , Laura M. Rival , Cassidy R. Sugimoto , Bertil Tungodden or Claudia Wagner .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Box-Steffensmeier, J.M., Burgess, J., Corbetta, M. et al. The future of human behaviour research. Nat Hum Behav 6 , 15–24 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01275-6

Download citation

Published : 27 January 2022

Issue Date : January 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01275-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Corporate social responsibility and individual behaviour.

• Herman Aguinis
• Deborah E. Rupp
• Ante Glavas

Nature Human Behaviour (2024)

Sustainable dietary choices improved by reflection before a nudge in an online experiment

• Sanchayan Banerjee
• Matteo M. Galizzi
• Susana Mourato

Nature Sustainability (2023)

Spatially Small-scale Approach-avoidance Behaviors Allow Learning-free Machine Inference of Object Preferences in Human Minds

• Tsung-Ren Huang
• Tzu-Chun Chen

International Journal of Social Robotics (2023)

Nature Human Behaviour turns five

Nature Human Behaviour (2022)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Advance articles
• Author Interviews
• Research Curations
• Author Guidelines
• Open Access
• Submission Site
• Why Submit?
• About Journal of Consumer Research
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

• WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF METHODOLOGY IN JCR?

Author notes

• < Previous

The Future of Consumer Research Methods: Lessons of a Prospective Retrospective

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Stacy Wood, The Future of Consumer Research Methods: Lessons of a Prospective Retrospective, Journal of Consumer Research , Volume 51, Issue 1, June 2024, Pages 151–156, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucae017

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Looking back at 50 years of Journal of Consumer Research methods and interviewing some of the field’s most respected methodologists, this article seeks to craft a core set of best practices for scholars in consumer research. From perennial issues like conceptual validity to emerging issues like data integrity and replicability, the advice offered by our experts can help scholars improve the way they approach their research questions, provide empirical evidence that instills confidence, use new tools to make research more inclusive or descriptive of the “real world,” and seek to become thought leaders.

Turning 50 is a reflective milestone for people and for journals. We can look back on fifty years of arduous labor, fruitful creation, bitter debate, and hard-won evolution. And, if we ignore theory, simply reflecting on the past, present, and future of consumer research methods , we have more than enough to consider. What does the history of consumer research methodology say about what could (or should) emerge in the next 50 years?

To begin, we can look back to the first episode of the Journal of Consumer Research ( JCR ), Volume 1(1), published in June 1974 and containing nine articles. The authors’ names are a Who’s Who list that we know primarily from legend (e.g., Katona, Day, Jacoby, Ferber), though one author, the prolific James R. Bettman, retired only this year. The methodologies used in the empirical papers are a pragmatic and effort-intensive collection: a set of four 20–30 minute interviews with 289 school-age boys (1st, 3rd, 5th grades) using independently trained interviewers and coders; personal interviews with 793 heads of household (HOH) in California with sample representative to state demographics and a second follow-up interview with 192 HOHs, a 4 × 4 experimental design of 192 “paid volunteer” Indiana housewives, a set of two interviews after 1 year of marriage and 2 years of marriage of ∼230 Illinois newlyweds, questionnaires about 25 purchases separately presented to husband–wife dyads in Belgium, and a questionnaire to 108 Indiana University students who reported being smokers. One methodological paper proposed a novel statistical analysis of consumer decision nets and verbal decision protocols. For those who believe that it used to be easy to do “just one study” for JCR in the good old days, the effort and deep care put into both the conceptual and external validity of data collection will belie that myth.

WHAT IS THE FUTURE OF METHODOLOGY IN JCR ?

The very first article in the very first issue of JCR speaks directly to our question of the future of consumer research. Fifty years ago, George Katona argued that the distinction between consumer research and traditional economic research on consumption (as would be appropriate in this then-new journal) was primarily a function of methodology . Katona (1974) sees the origin of true consumer research in the 1940s, saying “The survey method for collecting data on consumer behavior was practically unknown in economics immediately after World War II when the first surveys on the size and distribution of income, asset, and major expenditures were initiated with representative samples. Measures of both consumer attitudes and expectations were then developed” (1). While traditional economists might seek to find a single immutable human tendency underpinning a focal economic phenomenon, the consumer researcher was more interested in a wider descriptive exploration that would yield richer understanding. The consumer researcher, then, needed different data, including subjective reports of satisfaction, expectations, and perceived wealth. With different research questions, Katona explained that consumer research would focus more on micro-data and patterns of small situational moderators. He predicted that many economists would struggle to adopt behavioral research questions and methods but ended by stating “Looking back on three decades of research on consumer behavior, the proponents of behavioral studies of economic affairs have good reason for satisfaction.”

Katona argued that methodologies needed to evolve because the questions being asked about consumers were changing—a phenomenon we see today. Similarly, we can look at the “why and how” of our current labors to predict emergent methodologies and methodological issues. To this end, I conducted interviews with four consumer scholars known for their mastery of method and analysis, John Lynch, Leigh McAlister, Craig Thompson, and Rebecca Ratner, and asked them to reflect on the methodological history of JCR with an eye to the future.

Better Research Questions

A common refrain from our experts was the perennial challenge of starting with a “really good” research question. When asked, “What is the most important thing with methodology?” Leigh McAlister was quick to reply, “We are so obsessed with methodology, we’ve lost track of the questions .” The question, then, is what makes a question good? The answer, as I heard it, was less intuitive than might be expected.

First, we must distinguish between our research question as a program of work and as a particular project. For the former, our research questions are often too small. Good questions require that we sit and listen to real practitioners, that we learn how systems and supply chains work, that we actively explore the perspective from different communities’ lens, that we talk to people we disagree with, that we assume that effects will always be conditional, that we assume that effects are likely to change with time, that we wonder about downstream phenomena, and that we “get meta.” When we have that expansive expertise as our research raison d’etre , then we are better able to see what specific projects are interesting, how they could have impact, and how they might best be tested with confidence.

On the other hand, for the research question that drives any particular project, we are often much too broad. Here, we need focused purpose and focused conceptualization. A bad research question is one that posits an unreasonable generalization and then grudgingly offers a few boundary conditions. One characteristic of good questions is that they seem like something you could nail down with a few studies: (1) the population you need to study is identifiable, accessible, and compelling, (2) the context is specific and consequential, and (3) the conceptualization is clear, logical, and concrete enough to be operationalized closely.

Having invested in a broad research question for our program of study, we have the knowledge base, the long-term perspective, and the time to see the results of any single research question in a project as cumulative, adding to a more nuanced and more confident knowledge about what’s happening (and why) in our domain of interest. I know from experience that having a conceptually diverse portfolio of projects is a dangerously enticing temptation for scholars—so very interesting but requiring an exhausting amount of work to keep from doing each in a superficial way. At some point, scholars must find their one true thing—the research domain where they will invest their bounded resources, build grounded knowledge over years, and establish thought leadership. However, in a long and rich career, many of us will have more than one research focus in that span and that can help keep us motivated—what my old USC colleague, Bill Bearden, called the “fire in the belly.”

It is notable that our experts call us to consider how we choose our questions as two papers appearing in the special issue speak to the outcome. Wang et al. (2024) explore how the impact that any one paper may have is a function of its novelty in either topic, finding, or combinatorial approach—suggesting the core of what is an inherently interesting research question. Looking beyond any one paper, Pham, Wu, and Wang (2024) seek to recognize and conceptualize thought leadership as the combination of the amount of research that scholars publish and the impact of those publications. Their impact metric shows that having a clear focus on one’s work is often a common characteristic of scholars known as thought leaders. These articles offer both guidance to younger scholars seeking to build programs of research and, to more experienced scholars, a way to look at scholarly output through a new lens.

More Critical Consideration of Conceptual Validity

With an appropriately rich research question driving us and a sufficiently specific research question framing a project, are we then ready to talk about methodology? Not so fast, our experts warned; we have not yet emphasized the importance of conceptual validity ( MacKenzie 2003 ). As John Lynch said, “Validity is not a function of research technique, but a function of the inevitable incompleteness of our understanding of the phenomena we study.”

The experts note that, over the years, growing sophistication of analysis in the Journal of Consumer Research (and other journals, to be fair) has led some researchers to mistakenly believe “that fancy analytical models correct for everything.” Yet, others have outlined the danger of overemphasizing analytical sophistication to the detriment of other research basics ( Lehmann, McAlister, and Staelin 2011 ). In any study, what can we say with complete confidence about conceptual validity? We can say that we collected data in the form of specific questions or observations from a specific population under conditions that we altered in specific ways. As readers of scientific papers, we often struggle to understand exactly what these specifics were because they are re-named with conceptual labels assigned by the researcher. Thus, a researcher might require a participant to watch a clock while making a choice and then label that anything from time pressure to temporal salience to cognitive load. Perhaps, then, we need to be more descriptive about our operationalizations and, as our experts emphasize, more aware how stimulus-dependent and context-dependent our studies are. As we assess the nature of our own findings and those of others, we must try to learn from failures to replicate findings that are counter to expectations. It suggests that multi-pronged approaches are natural and necessary in any exploration. It suggests that we stop lamenting “the study didn’t work” but rather say “the study results were different and I’m going to see if I can tell why.”

Replications That Build Knowledge

By prioritizing conceptual reasoning, we accept the hard work of looking at the details of what is happening in any given study, but we also take the pressure off in different ways. Rebecca Ratner notes that “the review process exacerbates the file-drawer problem because researchers hear, ‘Don't include Study X because its findings aren't consistent and it complicates the story.’” And, while a focus on conceptual reasoning increases the difficulty in conducting and reporting replications (as we must consider whether a true conceptual replication is taking place rather than just copying stimuli), it takes the pressure off by reducing knee-jerk rejections of past work. Analyses over time allow for more data and therefore better understanding. This point echoes in our field; Sawyer and Peter (1983) wrote about the significance of significance, reminding us that using p < .05 as a certain and forever way of falsifying hypotheses is a false hope. They write, “Attention should be placed on the data themselves and their descriptions. Instead of relying solely on classical inferential statistics, researchers should make added use of replication, Bayesian statistics, meta-analysis, and strong inference to provide more meaningful examination of theoretical questions in marketing research.” This perspective is increasingly discussed in marketing ( McShane et al. 2024 ) and dominates other fields like biomedical research ( Savitz et al. 2024 ), where more studies of all sorts are simply ways to increase estimation accuracy. Ultimately, prioritizing conceptual validity is both harder and easier—it is harder to do, but easier to live with.

This echoes themes from two papers in the special issue. Eisend et al. (2024) contend that consumer research, as a distinct domain, demonstrates strong knowledge-building and is on an upward trajectory of increasingly distinct and robust effects, largely due to improvements in experimental methods and analysis. And, in moving forward, Urminsky and Dietvorst (2024) address estimation accuracy and the variability commonly observed in consumer research. They describe four types of replications that, when put into regular practice, can benefit researchers and knowledge-building.

New Populations, Methods, and Analyses

When asked what new methods and analyses are on the horizon, our experts had different perspectives. While Craig Thompson said, “new methods certainly arise over time in response to technological shifts—netnographies or more sophisticated QDA packages—but the foundational principles of anthropological, historical, and sociological analyses have remained fairly stable,” in contrast, Leigh McAlister enthused that the internet made so many more types and sources of data available and “new software fast followed” to allow better analysis of it. John Lynch and Rebecca Ratner saw some changes in field and lab studies but allowed they “weren’t that futuristic.” What then can we expect to see?

One overarching similarity our experts raised is a growing disillusionment with convenience samples, arguing that increased access to specific consumer populations suggests we should take greater care with how and where we recruit participants. There are two ways to increase the value of our participant groups; focus more tightly on the group of consumers who best illustrate our research question or cast a very wide net that captures consumer groups one would expect could differ. These strategies suggest different plans for analysis, but both serve to increase the reader’s confidence in the implications of the results. As Lynch (in a 1982 paper on external validity) argues, we don’t aim to “achieve” external validity, but rather to “assess” it by testing for background factor × treatment interactions and, for this, variation on background factors is needed.

Additionally, an increasingly networked and communication-enabled world means that we can share our findings with our participant populations and let them “speak back to the data.” Looking at JCR ’s first articles, while samples were often restricted to a convenience locale (e.g., a population of schoolboys in one town; Illinois newlyweds), they showed a depth of interaction (e.g., four interviews with each schoolboy; two surveys of the newlyweds spaced a year apart) which allowed for more of the participant’s input and interpretation to influence the researcher. That is the paradox of the new world of globally accessible data—we can use the internet to engage with a greater diversity of people, but we must be careful to not engage at the most distant or sterile remove.

If we can reach more or different people to be participants in our studies, we can also access and observe an expanded set of consumer behaviors. For example, we can study how people feel and think by looking at the language they use in public spaces; several of the experts saw textual analysis as a fast-growing and exciting research capability. We can track physiological measures to supplement or substitute for self-reports of affective and cognitive states; some experts saw the ability to better integrate physiological measures like eye-tracking or hormonal assays as a way to build new bridges between choice research and medical research. Online retail offers scope for large-scale field studies. Online choice contexts offer far more with attentional measures, process tracking, identity motivations, and following individuals across multiple platforms over time. The growth of large-scale databases (in both corporate and public policy sectors) over the last decade or two creates a promising opportunity to conduct longitudinal research without waiting years in primary research collection. A new methodological skill for the modern consumer researcher, then, is to become a better self-marketer, translator, and negotiator to those corporations and public organizations so that one is given access to existing longitudinal data. In university contexts, often the access to special populations or data is through grants and cooperative research projects that are common in other fields, but new to many in consumer research where we have long enjoyed the ability to do relatively inexpensive research under our own steam, oversight, and funding. Now, the modern consumer researcher will need methodological skills that improve interdisciplinary connections and serve to make them valued partners on multi-college grants.

Translation, Integration, and Intervention

Another new skill that consumer researchers are likely to need in the next 50 years in JCR is the ability to develop practical interfaces between real consumers/marketers and the knowledge we create. Our “job” in any one publication is to build knowledge, but there are many business school stakeholders (e.g., corporate and nonprofit partners, donors, students, administrators, society at large) who want more for their money; more so than in the past, academics are asked to take their ideas from the “bench” all the way to use. For example, the Journal of Marketing has a special issue that requires the inclusion of a web app designed for public use to help real-world marketers or consumers. This requires the ability to envision and design use-applications, but also to iterate more with practitioners to make sure our help really helps. Will this then lead to a research genre in consumer behavior akin to randomized clinical trial intervention studies? Either way, the ability to provide effective help relies on the rich breadth of knowledge advocated by our experts. As our experts agreed, if you do not know enough about the context of the domain, then you cannot understand whether any one consumer choice or behavior matters in the larger scheme. As with investigations of environmental sustainability, do our results show how shaping consumer choice is important, or rather that any attempt to ideally shape consumer choice is “a drop in the ocean”? When we try to create the intervention, we see how the importance of individual versus structural changes can shift with the cost/effort of the intervention and have a better appreciation for the constraints of the marketer acting in the real world.

Where Is Artificial Intelligence?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a frequent topic in future-oriented discussions of business and business research. But, perhaps surprisingly, it did not emerge as a leading topic in these interviews. There is increasing research on the use of AI in the marketplace, such as consumer resistance ( Longoni, Bonezzi, and Morewedge 2019 ), but our editorial team believes that we should begin talking more comprehensively about where AI will potentially be in common use by researchers. We can see its use in background research and literature reviews. We can see its use in writing and content creation such as surveys, stimuli, and manuscripts. We can see its use in data collection, data generation, and data analysis. We can even see its use in review and publication. This expansive scope of possibilities and an uncertain timeline may be exactly why many experts are not quick to offer strong predictions, either descriptively or prescriptively. As a field, we should carefully consider a futurecast of AI in research systems and call for more editorial thinking on these issues.

Confidence versus Integrity

One thing that captures attention in the changing world of research is the issue of data integrity. JCR , like many journals, sought to increase the transparency and accountability of research published in the journal by requiring datasets be provided and open to the review team. Readers can see the current policies at https://consumerresearcher.com/research-ethics . But, though any given set of policies may evolve, our experts focused on the two key issues: integrity and confidence. In this distinction, integrity is the table-stakes of research. When a researcher’s integrity is in question, no methodology they offer will matter. This is because there are so many places where consumer research methodologies are vulnerable to bad actors. Where data can be made up or manipulated. Where studies can be analyzed and then hidden in file drawers. Where interviewees can be led. Where meanings can be misinterpreted. Where p s can be hacked. Where outliers can be cleaned from the dataset. Where hands can be waved over problematic inconsistencies. Where best practices change with new abilities. Because most of these vulnerabilities are hard to protect and harder to police, we rely necessarily on the integrity of the researcher—the core belief that the researcher is providing the most unbiased and truthful test of their research question even if that means disproving their theories or having to give up on their idea. In other words, integrity in research is the researcher’s true curiosity about the answer to their research question, convenient or inconvenient to their own ends, and their striving to do all in their abilities to provide that answer.

Confidence is a function of persuasion, as the authors attempt to make a compelling argument for the evidence presented. How confident are we, as readers, that the supporting evidence is strong and accurately interpreted? This is a high hurdle and assumes that the author is acting with integrity. If the researcher is sincere and acts with integrity, we as readers now assess whether the researcher has done a good job. For example, is the focal construct distinct from other related constructs? How has the constructed been measured? How has it been manipulated? Did the instructions prompt participants in a certain direction? Were the authors careful to create clear tests, realistic stimuli, and unbiased contexts? Were the authors careful to shape interview scripts in a way that minimized interviewer influence or social desirability? Were research populations the most relevant for the research question or were they convenience populations? What analyses were used to shape interpretation of the data and were they the most appropriate or up to date?

Thus, there are many ways that a researcher can make their empirical evidence instill confidence through thoughtful design and testing. Other means are emerging. For example, some scholars appreciate preregistration as a means to discourage questionable research practices in overfitting data—something that can give readers confidence in the analysis of the researchers. However, other scholars see preregistration as a practice privileged to researchers with the budget to conduct multiple studies or as performative virtue-signaling. Because of this debate perhaps, preregistration has not been shown to increase trust in findings ( Field et al. 2020 ). In the end, there are many aspects of consumer research analysis (no matter the specific methodology) that are not wrong but still fail to instill confidence in the reader. To this end, JCR has often published work that sets a standard, especially in new or evolving areas, for what constitutes excellent evidence in a methodological domain and these types of papers will continue to be important to our field.

A 50-year retrospective provides a trajectory that we can follow in imagining future changes in methodology. New methodologies may emerge with novel technological capabilities, but their adoption is a function of whether they better answer the questions we are currently asking about consumers. One of the best things we can do for our methodological success is to be more critical in defining our research questions—a skill that requires honing across one’s career. We are well-served by framing different questions for our program of research (pushing ourselves to embrace the rich breadth of a domain) versus a research project (pushing ourselves to focus on one important and answerable question). Next, our work profits by critically considering our construct definition (and operationalization)—this is critical, as poor construct validity cannot be overcome with novel sophisticated analyses. The good news of greater effort in conceptual clarity is that it helps take pressure off any one study and guides replication efforts to focus on increasing estimation accuracy rather than disproving famous effects. There are new types of data to explore (textual, physiological, digital), and best practices will continue to evolve—most conclusively with methodological papers published to propose and teach emerging norms. Importantly, there are new populations of consumers to study and many new means to reach them in a meaningful way. Our methods may shift in our need to be better translators of the behaviors we observe and better able to view those behaviors within the wider systematic context, where practitioners seek to solve big problems and make significant changes to consumer behaviors. Our methods may need to mimic other prescriptive sciences (e.g., public health, medicine, environmental science) if we seek to provide solutions. We must embrace our own integrity and avoid a cynical attitude toward research and the review process. JCR —as an arbiter of integrity—walks the narrow path that protects both the accuser and the accused when breaches of integrity are suspected. Ultimately, however, the larger threat to consumer research is when we fail to have confidence in the empirical support for a project because of vague, convenient, superficial, sloppy, or out-of-date practices in data collection and analysis. In the end, our methodologies lie within a scholarly toolbox that also contains our curiosity, motivation, critical thinking, integrity, and openness.

Stacy Wood ( [email protected] ) is the J. Lloyd Langdon Distinguished University Professor of Marketing at the Poole College of Management, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA.

The author thanks the panel of esteemed consumer scholars—John Lynch, Leigh McAlister, Rebecca Ratner, and Craig Thompson—who shared their experiences, expertise, and love of research in deep and wide-ranging conversations. It is hoped that readers of this article benefit from their insights as much as the author who had the privilege of hearing them firsthand.

Eisend Martin , Pol Gratiana , Niewiadomska Dominika , Riley Joseph , Wedgeworth Rick ( 2024 ), “ How Much Have We Learned about Consumer Research? A Meta-Meta-Analysis ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 51 ( 1 ), forthcoming.

Google Scholar

Field Sarahane M. , Wagenmakers E. J. , Kiers H. A. L. , Hoekstra R. , Ernst A. F. , van Ravenzwaaij D. ( 2020 ), “ The Effect of Preregistration on Trust in Empirical Research Findings: Results of a Registered Report ,” Royal Society Open Science , 7 ( 4 ), 181351 .

Katona George ( 1974 ), “ Psychology and Consumer Economics ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 1 ( 1 ), 1 – 8 .

Lehmann Donald R. , McAlister Leigh , Staelin Richard ( 2011 ), “ Sophistication in Research in Marketing ,” Journal of Marketing , 75 ( 4 ), 155 – 65 .

Longoni Chiara , Bonezzi Andrea , Morewedge Carey K. ( 2019 ), “ Resistance to Medical Artificial Intelligence ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 46 ( 4 ), 629 – 50 .

Lynch John G. ( 1982 ), “ On the External Validity of Experiments in Consumer Research ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 9 (3), 225 – 39 . https://doi.org/10.1086/208919

MacKenzie Scott B. ( 2003 ), “ The Dangers of Poor Construct Conceptualization ,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science , 31 ( 3 ), 323 – 6 .

McShane Blake B. , Bradlow Eric T. , Lynch John G. , Meyer Robert J. ( 2024 ), “ “Statistical Significance” and Statistical Reporting: Moving beyond Binary ,” Journal of Marketing . https://doi.org/10.1177/00222429231216910

Pham Michel Tuan , Wu Alisa Yinghao , Wang Danqi ( 2024 ), “ Benchmarking Scholarship in Consumer Research: The p-Index of Thought Leadership ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 51 ( 1 ), forthcoming.

Savitz David A. , Wise Lauren A. , Bond Julia C. , Hatch Elizabeth E. , Ncube Collette N. , Wesselink Amelia K. , Willis Mary D. , Yland Jennifer J. , Rothman Kenneth J. ( 2024 ), “ Responding to Reviewers and Editors about Statistical Significance Testing ,” Annals of Internal Medicine , 177 ( 3 ), 385 – 6 . https://doi.org/ 10.7326/M23-2430

Sawyer Alan G. , Peter J. Paul ( 1983 ), “ The Significance of Statistical Significance Tests in Marketing Research ,” Journal of Marketing Research , 20 ( 2 ), 122 – 33 .

Urminsky Oleg , Dietvorst Berkeley J. ( 2024 ), “ Taking the Full Measure: Integrating Replication into Research Practice to Assess Generalizability ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 51 ( 1 ), forthcoming.

Wang Xin (Shane) , Hyun (Joseph) Ryoo Jun , Campbell Margaret C. , Inman J. Jeffrey ( 2024 ), “ Unraveling Impact: Exploring Effects of Novelty in Top Consumer Research Journals ,” Journal of Consumer Research , 51 ( 1 ), forthcoming.

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1537-5277
• Print ISSN 0093-5301
• Copyright © 2024 Journal of Consumer Research Inc.
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Submit your COVID-19 Pandemic Research
• Research Leap Manual on Academic Writing
• Conduct Your Survey Easily
• Research Tools for Primary and Secondary Research
• Useful and Reliable Article Sources for Researchers
• Tips on writing a Research Paper
• Stuck on Your Thesis Statement?
• Out of the Box
• How to Organize the Format of Your Writing
• Argumentative Versus Persuasive. Comparing the 2 Types of Academic Writing Styles
• Very Quick Academic Writing Tips and Advices
• Top 4 Quick Useful Tips for Your Introduction
• Have You Chosen the Right Topic for Your Research Paper?
• Follow These Easy 8 Steps to Write an Effective Paper
• 7 Errors in your thesis statement
• How do I even Write an Academic Paper?
• Useful Tips for Successful Academic Writing

Transformative Forces: Social Entrepreneurship as Key Competency

Virtual learning experiences among postgraduate students in namibia, collaborative governance in government administration in the field of state security along the republic of indonesia (ri)-malaysia border area.

• IT Service Management System Practices in Kenya
• Introduction Economic and Psychological Well-Being During COVID-19 Pandemic in Albania, A Need for Sustainability
• Designing a Framework for Assessing Agripreneurship Action for the Green Scheme Irrigation Projects, Namibia
• The Potential Utilisation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Enterprises
• Case Study – Developing a National Research and Evidence Base for The Health and Wellbeing Chapter of The Welsh Government’s 2023 Innovation Strategy for Wales
• Slide Share

The future of research: Emerging trends and new directions in scientific inquiry

The world of research is constantly evolving, and staying on top of emerging trends is crucial for advancing scientific inquiry. With the rapid development of technology and the increasing focus on interdisciplinary research, the future of research is filled with exciting opportunities and new directions.

In this article, we will explore the future of research, including emerging trends and new directions in scientific inquiry. We will examine the impact of technological advancements, interdisciplinary research, and other factors that are shaping the future of research.

One of the most significant trends shaping the future of research is the rapid development of technology. From big data analytics to machine learning and artificial intelligence, technology is changing the way we conduct research and opening up new avenues for scientific inquiry. With the ability to process vast amounts of data in real-time, researchers can gain insights into complex problems that were once impossible to solve.

Another important trend in the future of research is the increasing focus on interdisciplinary research. As the boundaries between different fields of study become more fluid, interdisciplinary research is becoming essential for addressing complex problems that require diverse perspectives and expertise. By combining the insights and methods of different fields, researchers can generate new insights and solutions that would not be possible with a single-discipline approach.

One emerging trend in research is the use of virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) to enhance scientific inquiry. VR/AR technologies have the potential to transform the way we conduct experiments, visualize data, and collaborate with other researchers. For example, VR/AR simulations can allow researchers to explore complex data sets in three dimensions, enabling them to identify patterns and relationships that would be difficult to discern in two-dimensional representations.

Another emerging trend in research is the use of open science practices. Open science involves making research data, methods, and findings freely available to the public, facilitating collaboration and transparency in the scientific community. Open science practices can help to accelerate the pace of research by enabling researchers to build on each other’s work more easily and reducing the potential for duplication of effort.

The future of research is also marked by scientific innovation, with new technologies and approaches being developed to address some of the world’s most pressing problems. For example, gene editing technologies like CRISPR-Cas9 have the potential to revolutionize medicine by allowing scientists to edit DNA and cure genetic diseases. Similarly, nanotechnology has the potential to create new materials with unprecedented properties, leading to advances in fields like energy, electronics, and medicine.

One new direction in research is the focus on sustainability and the environment. With climate change and other environmental issues becoming increasingly urgent, researchers are turning their attention to developing sustainable solutions to the world’s problems. This includes everything from developing new materials and technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to developing sustainable agricultural practices that can feed the world’s growing population without damaging the environment.

Another new direction in research is the focus on mental health and wellbeing. With mental health issues becoming increasingly prevalent, researchers are exploring new approaches to understanding and treating mental illness. This includes everything from developing new therapies and medications to exploring the role of lifestyle factors like diet, exercise, and sleep in mental health.

In conclusion, the future of research is filled with exciting opportunities and new directions. By staying on top of emerging trends, embracing interdisciplinary research, and harnessing the power of technological innovation, researchers can make significant contributions to scientific inquiry and address some of the world’s most pressing problems.

Suggested Articles

The Role of Primary and Secondary Research Tools in Your Survey Try a New Method…

The world of research funding is undergoing significant changes, with new funding models and approaches…

Entrepreneurship has been a hot topic for several years now, and with the pace of…

Peer review is an essential component of scientific publishing. It involves the critical evaluation of…

Related Posts

Comments are closed.

Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox , Microsoft Edge , Google Chrome , or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback .

We'd appreciate your feedback. Tell us what you think! opens in new tab/window

The future of research revealed

April 20, 2022

By Adrian Mulligan

Researchers lay bare the challenges and opportunities they face in a post-COVID world

The research ecosystem has been undergoing rapid and profound change, accelerated by COVID-19. This transformation is being fueled by many factors, including advances in technology, funding challenges and opportunities, political uncertainty, and new pressures on women in research.

At Elsevier, we have been working with the global research community to better understand these changes and what the world of research might look like in the future. The results were published today in Elsevier’s new Research Futures Report 2.0

Commenting on the report, Elsevier Research Director Adrian Mulligan said:

It’s clear from the results of the Research Futures Report 2.0 that we’re at a point of change. There is uncertainty and added pressures on the research community because of the pandemic. Universities, governments, research information providers, and funders working collaboratively are best positioned to help researchers manage that pressure.

Despite this uncertainty, researchers also believe there are long-term opportunities, most notably new levels of collaboration and openness across the research community, plus new sources of funding and technologies, which can help create a bright future for research.

Adrian Mulligan talks about the previous  Research Futures  report with colleagues in New York.

The report builds on a previous Research Futures study in 2019, carried out with the global research agency Ipsos MORI to gather predictions from funders, publishers, technology experts and researchers on what research might look like in 10 years’ time. The aim of the Research Futures project is to gather the views and opinions of researchers across the world to help us better understand the challenges and opportunities they face. Elsevier will use these insights to look at steps we could take to better support the research community in the future.

One point is clear: we can best prepare for the future by working together.

Key findings

Publishing moves faster, with more open knowledge.

The  Research Futures Report 2.0  shows that the past two years have driven progress in both speed and openness in the communication of research. Around two-thirds (67%) of researchers globally now consider preprints a valued source of communication, up from 43% before the pandemic — a shift likely driven by the increased role of preprints in finding ways to tackle COVID-19. While preprints are becoming more popular, they have not benefited from the pivotal role of peer review or had any additional value added to them by publishers. For example, 94% of version-of-record articles published in Elsevier journals have content changes made during the editorial process, and 13% of submissions go through major changes, according to 2021 Elsevier data. Also, 54% of respondents said they planned to publish open access, 6% higher than in 2019.

Funding is harder, but new opportunities emerge

Despite COVID spotlighting the importance of research, funding continues to be a major challenge for researchers, with half (50%) stating there is insufficient funding available in their field. Just one in four (24%) researchers believe there is enough funding for their work; worryingly, this figure has declined from nearly one in three (30%) in 2020. Researchers cite fewer funding sources, increased competition, changing priorities and the diversion of funds to COVID-19 related fields.

Looking ahead, researchers expect more money for research to become available from businesses, with 41% believing that corporate funding for research will increase. Government funding has also increased as a proportion of research budgets since 2019, which has led to a growth of funding across various subjects. For example, Materials Science research has seen the biggest growth in funding satisfaction in 2021, with 35% saying available funding is sufficient — almost triple the percentage (12%) who were satisfied with funding levels in 2020.

Women in research face new pressures — and adapt

While women in research were faster to adapt during the pandemic, they still face unique challenges. Elsevier’s research shows that they are:

Expecting to collaborate more than they did before the pandemic: 64% expect to increase work with researchers across different scientific disciplines, up from 49% in 2020.

Embracing technology faster than their male counterparts: 53% of women scientists think the use of technology in research will accelerate over the next 2 to 5 years versus 46% for men.

More likely to have shared their research with the wider public than men: 60% of women versus 55% of men have shared their research publicly.

Women reported having less time to do research during lockdowns, which could slow or hamper their future career prospects. 62% reported they were finding it difficult to find a good work-life balance during the pandemic, compared to just 50% of male researchers — a trend which could have significant negative long-term effects on the careers of women in research.

Researchers are collaborating more

As teaching, publishing and funding accelerate and increase the pressure on researchers, how they work has changed — and not necessarily for the worse. Researchers are collaborating more. Just over half (52%) state that they are sharing more research data now than 2 to 3 years ago, and the number of researchers who say they are collaborating more than in the past has grown to 63% from 48% pre-pandemic. The gains are across geographies and disciplines. Researchers in Computer Science have seen the biggest rise, with 76% agreeing that there is more collaboration involved in their projects than previously — a substantial rise from the 41% who agreed pre-pandemic.

More researchers are embracing AI

AI has been embraced more than ever during the past two years, though some caution remains. 16% of researchers are extensive users of AI in their research, and while high take-up in Computer Sciences skews that number (64% of computer scientists are heavy users), attitudes across a number of specialties have grown more positive. In Materials Science, which covers the structure and properties of materials and the discovery of new materials and how they are made, 18% are now likely to be extensive users of AI in their research, up from zero a year ago; in Chemistry, the number has grown from 2% to 19% and, in Maths, from 4% to 13% since 2020. Attitudes towards the use of AI in peer review is perhaps where we have seen the greatest shift in attitude: 21% of researchers agree they would read papers peer reviewed by AI — a 5-percentage point increase from 2019. Those age 55 and under are the most willing to read AI-reviewed articles (21%), while those age 56 and over have increased their willingness compared to a year ago (19%, up from 14% last year). At the same time, most researchers surveyed continue to object to AI peer review, with almost two in three unwilling to read such articles (58 percent) — a similar proportion as in 2020.

Download a summary of key research results opens in new tab/window

Download data analyses of research results opens in new tab/window

Project methodology

In total, over 2,000 researchers responded to two separate global surveys: 1,173 researchers responded in July-August 2021 and 1,066 in July 2020. Responses have been weighted to be representative of the global researcher population by country (UNESCO/OECD data). Base sizes shown in this report are unweighted unless otherwise stated. The full methodology is available in the report.

Contributor

Adrian Mulligan

Research Director for Customer Insights, Elsevier

The Future of Qualitative Research

• First Online: 29 September 2022

Cite this chapter

• Robert E. White   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8045-164X 3 &
• Karyn Cooper 4  

1474 Accesses

1 Citations

At this point, it appears that we have reached the final chapter of this volume. As we have worked our way through the various chapters and have investigated numerous qualitative methodologies, it has always been uppermost in the minds of the authors to offer as complete and concise an explanation as possible. However, the world of qualitative research is anything but complete and, at the same time, is definitely not concise. Confusions, commonalities and customizations appear to be the order of the day. And, here we find ourselves at the final chapter.

We are all interpretive bricoleurs stuck in the present working against the past as we move into the future. N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln ( 2000 )

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Altheide, D. (1987). Reflections: Ethnographic content analysis. Qualitative Sociology, 10 (1), 65–77.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bauman, Z. (1997). Postmodernity and its discontents . Polity Press.

Google Scholar  

Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid times: Living in an age of uncertainty . Polity Press.

Bauman, Z. (2019). Thinking sociologically (3rd ed.). Wiley.

Bennett, P., Slater, J., & Wall, P. ( 2010 ). A2 media studies: The essential introduction . Routledge.

Blumenreich, M. (2004). Avoiding the pitfalls of ‘conventional’ narrative research: Using poststructural theory to guide the creation of narratives of children with HIV. Qualitative research, 4 (1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104041108

Bogdan, & Biklen. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods . Allyn & Bacon.

Bold, C. (2012). Using narrative in research . SAGE.

Book   Google Scholar  

Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (1989). Multimethod research: A synthesis of styles . Sage.

Brewer, J., & Hunter, A. (2006). Foundations of multimethod research: Synthesizing styles . Sage.

Brink, P. J., & Wood, M. J. (1978). Basic steps in planning nursing research: From question to proposal . Duxbury Press.

Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003). “Clear as mud:” Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2 (2), 1–13.

Cardinal, L. (2001). What is an Indigenous perspective? Canadian Journal of Native Education , 25 (20), 180–182.

Carrington, S., & Iyer, R. (2011). Service-Learning within higher education: rhizomatic interconnections between university and the real world. Australian Journal of Teacher Education , 36 (6), 1–14. Retrieved November 27, 2020, from: https://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1579&context=ajte

Castellano, M. B. (2004). Ethics of Aboriginal research. International Journal of Indigenous Health, 1 (1), 98–114.

Chambers, C. (1999). A topography for Canadian curriculum theory. Canadian Journal of Education, 24 (2), 137–150.

Charney, R. (2017). Rhizomatic learning and adapting: A case study exploring an interprofessional team’s lived experiences . Dissertations & theses. 382. Retrieved November 25, 2020, from http://aura.antioch.edu/etds/382

Cheng, C.-Y., Sanchez-Burks, J., & Lee, F. (2008). Connecting the dots within: Creative performance and identity integration. Psychological Science, 19 (11), 1177–1183.

Cooper, S., & Endacott, R. (2007). Generic qualitative research: A design for qualitative research in emergency care? Emergency Medical Journal, 24 (12), 816–819.

Cooper, K., & White, R. E. (2012). Qualitative research in the postmodern era: Contexts of qualitative research . Springer.

Crabtree, B. F., & Miller, W. L. (1999). Doing qualitative research . Sage.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research . Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Sage.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003). Advanced mixed methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (1st ed., pp. 209–240). Sage.

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia . University of Minnesota.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of qualitative research (1st ed.). Sage.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Sage.

Dickens, C. (2008). Bleak house . Oxford University Press.

Donald, D. (2009). Forts, curriculum, and Indigenous Métissage: Imagining adecolonization of Aboriginal-Canadian realations in educational contexts. First Nations Perspectives, 2 (1), 1–24.

Donald, D. (2012). Indigenous Métissage: A decolonizing research sensibility. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25 (5), 533–555.

Eisner, E. W., & Peshkin, A. (1990). Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate . Teachers College Press.

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62 (1), 107–115.

Elo, S., Kääriäinen, M., Kanste, O., Pölkki, T., Utriainen, K., & Kyngäs, H. (2014). Qualitative content analysis: A focus on trustworthiness. Sage Open Publications, 4 (1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014522633

Feyeraband, P. (1978). Science in a free society . Verso.

Gannon, S. (2006). The (im)possibilities of writing the self-writing: French poststructural theory and autoethnography. Critical Studies: Critical Methodologies, 6 (4), 474–495.

Geertz, C. (1973). Interpretation of cultures . Basic Books.

Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays of education, the arts, and social change . Jossey-Bass.

Guerin, C. (2013). Rhizomatic research cultures, writing groups and academic researcher identities. International Journal of Doctoral Studies , 8 , 137–150. Retrieved from http://ijds.org/Volume8/IJDSv8p137-150Guerin0400.pdf

Gutiérrez, K. D. (2016). Designing resilient ecologies: Social design experiments and a new social imagination. Educational Researcher, 45 (3), 187–196.

Hammersley, M. (2004). Teaching Qualitative Method: As craft, profession, or bricolage? Retrieved September 23, 2019, from https://martynhammersley.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/teaching-qualitative-methodology-finalfff1.pdf

Hebdige, D. (1979). Subculture: The meaning of style . Routledge.

Honan, E. , & Sellers, M. (2011). So how does it work? Rhizomatic methodologies . Retrieved, November 24, 2020, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43479719_So_how_does_it_work_-_Rhizomatic_methodologies

Hsieh, H., & Shannon, S. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15 (9), 1277–1288.

Humphreys, C. (2013). Rhizomatic writing and pedagogy: Deleuze & Guattari and Heidegger. Journal of Educational Thought, 46 (3), 191–295.

Irwin, R. L., Beer, R., Springgay, S., Grauer, K., Xiong, G., & Bickel, B. (2006). The rhizomatic relations of a/r/tography. Studies in Art Education, 48 (1), 70–88.

Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1 (2), 112–133.

Kellner, D. (1999). Theorizing McDonaldization: A multiperspectivist approach. In B. Smart (Ed.), Resisting McDonaldization (pp. 186–206). Sage.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Kincheloe, J. L. (2001). Describing the bricolage: Conceptualizing a new rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7 (6), 679–692.

Kincheloe, J. L. (2004a). Questions of disciplinarity/interdisciplinarity in a changing world. In J. L. Kincheloe & K. S. Berry (Eds.), Rigour and complexity in educational research: Conceptualizing the bricolage (pp. 50–81). Open University Press.

Kincheloe, J. L. (2004b). Redefining rigour and complexity in research. In J. L. Kincheloe & K. S. Berry (Eds.), Rigour and complexity in educational research: Conceptualizing the bricolage (pp. 23–49). Open University Press.

Kincheloe, J. L. (2005). Critical constructivism primer . P. Lang.

Kincheloe, J., & Berry, K. (2004). Rigour and complexity in educational research: Conceptualizing the bricolage . Open University Press.

Kirkevold, M., & Bergland, Å. (2007). The quality of qualitative data: Issues to consider when interviewing participants who have difficulties providing detailed accounts of their experiences. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health & Well-being, 2 (2), 68–75.

Ko, D., & Bal, A. (2019). Rhizomatic research design in a smooth space of learning: Rupturing, connecting and generating. Critical Education, 10 (17), 1–20.

Kuhl, D. E. (2014). Voices count: Employing a critical narrative research bricolage for insights into dyscalculia . Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository, 2149. Retrieved August 28, 2019, from https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3612&context=etd

Levin, T. H. (2017). Studying teacher collaboration: Preparing for and conducting interviews on sensitive topics with reluctant interviewees . Sage.

Lévi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind . University of Chicago Press.

Lincoln, Y. S. (2012). Foreword. In K. Cooper & R. E. White (Eds.), Qualitative research in the postmodern era: Contexts of qualitative research . Springer.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry . Sage.

Masny, D. (2014). Disrupting ethnography through rhizoanalysis. Qualitative Research in Education, 3 (3), 345–363.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception . Routledge.

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach . Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study: Applications in education . Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.

Morgan, D. (1993). Qualitative content analysis: A guide to paths not taken. Qualitative Health Research, 3 (1), 112–121.

National Institutes of Health Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences. (2018). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences (2nd ed.). US Department of Health and Human Services.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Reilly, M. A. (2014). To enter stone, be water: Situating literacy coaching as rhizomatic. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 30 (3), 293–295.

Rogers, M. (2012). Contextualizing theories and practices of bricolage research. The Qualitative Report, 17 (48), 1–17.

Sanchez-Burks, J., Karlesky, M. J., & Lee, F. (2015). Psychological bricolage: Integrating social identity to produce creative solutions. In C. E. Shalley, M. A. Hitt, & J. Zhou (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship (pp. 93–102). Oxford University Press.

Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23 (4), 334–340.

Sherman, B. (2018). Cultivating the rhizome: Coaching (through) assemblage . Conference paper. AERA. April 12, 2018.

Silverman, D. (1997). Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice . Sage.

St. Pierre, E. A. (2011). Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative inquiry (4th ed., pp. 611–635). Sage.

St. Pierre, E. A. (2017). Deleuze and Guattari’s language for new empirical inquiry. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 49 (11), 1080–1089.

Strom, K. J., & Martin, A. D. (2017). Becoming-teacher: A rhizomatic look at first-year teaching . Sense Publishers.

Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. R., & MacDonald-Emes, J. (1997). Interpretive description: A noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Research in Nursing & Health, 20 (2), 169–177.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (2015). Final report . Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.

Turkle, S. (1997). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet . Touchstone.

Weick, K. E. (1993). Organizational redesign as improvisation. In G. P. Huber & W. H. Glick (Eds.), Organizational change and redesign: Ideas and insights for improving performance (pp. 346–379). Oxford University Press.

Wibberley, C. (2016). Bricolage research methods. In E. A. Glasper & C. Rees (Eds.), Nursing and health care research at a glance (pp. 106–107). Wiley Blackwell.

Willis, J. W. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches . Sage.

Wood, M. J., & Ross-Kerr, J. C. (2011). Basic steps in planning nursing research: From question to proposal (7th ed.). Jones & Bartlett.

Yardley, A. (2008). Piecing together: A methodological bricolage. Forum: Qualitative Social Research , 9 (2), Art. 31. Retrieved, August 28, 2019, from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0802315

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Education, St. Francis Xavier University, Antigonish, NS, Canada

Robert E. White

OISE, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

Karyn Cooper

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert E. White .

Describing the Bricolage: Conceptualizing a New Rigor in Qualitative Research

Joe L. Kincheloe

City University of New York Graduate Center/Brooklyn College

Kincheloe, J. L. (2001). Conceptualizing a New Rigor in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 7 (6), 679-692.

Picking up on Norman Denzin’s and Yvonna Lincoln’s articulation of the concept of bricolage, the essay describes a critical notion of this research orientation. As an interdisciplinary approach, bricolage avoids both the superficiality of methodological breadth and the parochialism of unidisciplinary approaches. The notion of the bricolage advocated here recognizes the dialectical nature of the disciplinary and interdisciplinary relationship and promotes a synergistic interaction between the two concepts. In this context, the bricolage is concerned not only with divergent methods of inquiry but with diverse theoretical and philosophical understandings of the various elements encountered in the act of research. The insights garnered here move researchers to a better conceptual grasp of the complexity of the research act—a cognizance often missed in mainstream versions of qualitative research. In particular, critical bricoleurs employ historiographical, philosophical, and social theoretical lenses to gain a more complex understanding of the intricacies of research design.

As a preface to this essay, I want to express what an honor it is for me to deliver the Egon Guba Lecture. I consider Egon one of the most important figures in research in the 20th and 21st centuries and consider his career the best model I know for a life of rigorous, innovative scholarship in education. Every idea expressed in this essay is tied to concepts Egon developed over the past few decades. If they are insufficiently developed, it is an expression of my limitations, not his. In this spirit, I dedicate this lecture to Egon Guba and his innovative scholarship and pedagogy.

My desire to write this essay and ultimately a more comprehensive work on bricolage comes from two sources. The first involves my fascination with Denzin and Lincoln’s (2000) use of the term in their work on research methods over the past decade. From my perspective, no concept better captures the possibility of the future of qualitative research. When I first encountered the term in their work, I knew that I would have to devote much effort to specifying the notion and pushing it to the next conceptual level. Secondly, coupled with this recognition of the power of bricolage was the experience several of my doctoral students brought back from their job interviews. Prepped and ready to answer in detail questions about their methods and research agendas, my students spoke of their theoretical embrace and methodological employment of the bricolage. Much too often for our comfort, search committee members responded quite negatively: “bricolage, oh I know what that is; that’s when you really don’t know anything about research but have a lot to say about it.” Much to our dismay, the use of the concept persuaded such committee members not to employ the students. I had no choice, I had to respond.

Yvonna Lincoln and Norm Denzin (2000) used the term in the spirit of Claude Levi-Strauss (1966) and his lengthy discussion of it in The Savage Mind . The French word, bricoleur , describes a handyman or handywoman who makes use of the tools available to complete a task. Some connotations of the term involve trickery and cunning and remind me of the chicanery of Hermes, in particular his ambiguity concerning the messages of the gods. If hermeneutics came to connote the ambiguity and slipperiness of textual meaning, then bricolage can also imply the fictive and imaginative elements of the presentation of all formal research. Indeed, as cultural studies of science have indicated, all scientific inquiry is jerryrigged to a degree; science, as we all know by now, is not nearly as clean, simple, and procedural as scientists would have us believe. Maybe this is an admission many in our field would wish to keep in the closet. Maybe at a tacit level this is what many search com- mittee members were reacting to when my doctoral students discussed it so openly, enthusiastically, and unabashedly.

Bricolage in the Cosmos of Disciplinarity and Interdisciplinarity

My umbrage at the denigration of bricolage by my students’ interlocutors should in no way be taken as disrespect for those who question the value of the concept. For those of us committed to theorizing and implementing such an approach to research, there are some profound questions that need to be answered as we plot our course. As we think in terms of using multiple methods and perspectives in our research and attempt to synthesize contemporary developments in social theory, epistemology, and interpretation, we must consider the critiques of many diverse scholars. At the core of the deployment of bricolage in the discourse of research rests the question of disciplinarity/interdisciplinarity. Bricolage, of course, signifies interdisciplinarity—a concept that serves as a magnet for controversy in the contemporary academy. Researching this article, I listened to several colleagues maintain that if one is focused on getting tenure he or she should eschew interdisciplinarity; if one is interested in only doing good research, she or he should embrace it.

Implicit in the critique of interdisciplinarity and thus of bricolage as its manifestation in research is the assumption that interdisciplinarity is by nature superficial. Superficiality results when scholars, researchers, and students fail to devote sufficient time to understanding the disciplinary fields and knowledge bases from which particular modes of research emanate. Many maintain that such an effort leads not only to superficiality but madness. Attempting to know so much, the bricoleur not only knows nothing well but also goes crazy in the misguided process (Friedman, 1998; McLeod, 2000; Palmer, 1996). My assertion in this article respects these questions and concerns but argues that given the social, cultural, epistemological, and paradigmatic upheavals and alterations of the past few decades, rigorous researchers may no longer enjoy the luxury of choosing whether to embrace the bricolage (Friedman, 1998; McLeod, 2000).

The Great Implosion: Dealing with the Debris of Disciplinarity

Once understanding of the limits of objective science and its universal knowledge escaped from the genie’s bottle, there was no going back. Despite the best efforts to recover “what was lost” in the implosion of social science, too many researchers understand its socially constructed nature, its value- laden products that operate under the flag of objectivity, its avoidance of contextual specificities that subvert the stability of its structures, and its fragmenting impulse that moves it to fold its methodologies and the knowledge they produce neatly into disciplinary drawers. My argument here is that we must operate in the ruins of the temple, in a postapocalyptic social, cultural, psychological, and educational science where certainty and stability have long departed for parts unknown.

In the best sense of Levi-Straus’s (1966) concept, the research bricoleurs pick up the pieces of what’s left and paste them together as best they can. The critics are probably correct, such a daunting task cannot be accomplished in the time span of a doctoral program; but the process can be named and the dimensions of a lifetime scholarly pursuit can be in part delineated. Our transcendence of the old regime’s reductionism and our understanding of the complexity of the research task demand the lifetime effort. It is this lifetime commitment to study, clarify, sophisticate, and add to the bricolage that this article advocates.

As bricoleurs recognize the limitations of a single method, the discursive strictures of one disciplinary approach, what is missed by traditional practices of validation, the historicity of certified modes of knowledge production, the inseparability of knower and known, and the complexity and hetero- geneity of all human experience, they understand the necessity of new forms of rigor in the research process. To account for their cognizance of such complexity bricoleurs seek a rigor that alerts them to new ontological insights. In this ontological context, they can no longer accept the status of an object of inquiry as a thing-in-itself. Any social, cultural, psychological, or pedagogical object of inquiry is inseparable from its context, the language used to describe it, its historical situatedness in a larger ongoing process, and the socially and culturally constructed interpretations of its meaning(s) as an entity in the world (Morawski, 1997).

Rigor in the Ruins

Thus, bricolage is concerned not only with multiple methods of inquiry but with diverse theoretical and philosophical notions of the various elements encountered in the research act. Bricoleurs understand that the ways these dynamics are addressed—whether overtly or tacitly—exerts profound influence on the nature of the knowledge produced by researchers. Thus, these aspects of research possess important lived world political consequences, as they shape the ways we come to view the social cosmos and operate within it (Blommaert, 1997). In this context, Douglas Kellner’s (1995) notion of a “multiperspectival cultural studies” is helpful, as it draws on numerous textual and critical strategies to “interpret, criticize, and deconstruct” the cultural artifacts under observation.

Employing Nietzsche’s notion of perspectivism to ground his version of a multimethodological research strategy, Kellner (1995) maintains that any single research perspective is laden with assumptions, blindnesses, and limitations. To avoid one-sided reductionism, he contends that researchers must learn a variety of ways of seeing and interpreting in the pursuit of knowledge. The more perspectival variety a researcher employs, Kellner concludes, the more dimensions and consequences of a text will be illuminated. Kellner’s multiperspectivism resonates with Denzin and Lincoln’s (2000) bricolage and its concept of “blurred genres.” To better “interpret, criticize, and deconstruct,” Denzin and Lincoln call for bricoleurs to employ “hermeneutics, structuralism, semiotics, phenomenology, cultural studies, and feminism” (p. 3). Embedded in Kellner’s (1995) and Denzin and Lincoln’s (2000) calls is the proto-articulation of a new rigor—certainly in research but with implications for scholarship and pedagogy in general.

This rigor in the ruins of traditional disciplinarity connects a particular concept—in contemporary education, for example, the call for educational standards—to the epistemological, ontological, cultural, social, political, economic, psychological, and pedagogical domains for the purpose of multiperspectival analysis. In the second edition of their Handbook of Qualitative Research , Denzin and Lincoln (2000) maintain that this process has already taken place to some extent; they referred to it as a two-way methodological Diaspora where humanists migrated to the social sciences and social scientists to the humanities. Ethnographic methodologists snuggled up with textual analysts; in this context the miscegenation of the empirical and the interpretive produced the bricoleur love child.

Thus, in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, disciplinary demarcations no longer shape in the manner they once did in the way scholars look at the world. Indeed, disciplinary boundaries have less and less to do with the way scholars group themselves and build intellectual communities. Furthermore, what we refer to as the traditional disciplines in the first decade of the 21st century are anything but fixed, uniform, and monolithic structures. It is not uncommon for contemporary scholars in a particular discipline to report that they find more commonalities with individuals in different fields of study than they do with colleagues in their own disciplines. We occupy a scholarly world with faded disciplinary boundary lines. Thus, the point need not be made that bricolage should take place—it already has and is continuing. The research work needed in this context involves opening an elastic conversa- tion about the ways such a bricolage can be rigorously developed. Such cultivation should not take place in pursuit of some form of proceduralization but an effort to better understand the beast and to realize its profound possibilities (Friedman, 1998; Palmer, 1996; Young & Yarbrough, 1993).

Bricolage and the Dialectical View of Disciplinarity

Questions of disciplinarity permeate efforts to theorize the research bricolage. Exploring such inquiries, one notes a consistent division between disciplinarians and interdisciplinarians: Disciplinarians maintain that interdisciplinary approaches to analysis and research result in superficiality; interdisciplinary proponents argue that disciplinarity produces naïve overspecialization. The vision of the bricolage promoted here recognizes the dialectical nature of this disciplinary and interdisciplinary relationship and calls for a synergistic interaction between the two concepts. Before one can engage successfully in the bricolage, it is important to develop a rigorous understanding of the ways traditional disciplines have operated. I maintain the best way to do this is to study the workings of a particular discipline. In the context of becoming a bricoleur, such a study would not take place in the traditional manner where scholars learned to accept the conventions of a particular discipline as a natural way of producing knowledge and viewing a particular aspect of the world.

Instead, such a disciplinary study would be conducted more like a Foucauldian genealogy where scholars would study the social construction of the discipline’s knowledge bases, epistemologies, and knowledge production methodologies. As scholars analyzed the historical origins of the field, they would trace the emergence of various schools of thought, conflicts within the discipline, and the nature and effects of paradigmatic changes. In this genealogical context they would explore the discipline as a discursive system of regulatory power with its propensity to impound knowledge within arbitrary and exclusive boundaries. In this context, scholars would come to understand the ideological dimensions of the discipline and the ways knowledge is produced for the purposes of supporting various power blocs.

It is not contradictory, I assert, to argue in a dialectical spirit that at the same time this genealogical analysis is taking place, the bricoleur would also be studying positive features of the discipline. Even though the discipline operates in a power-saturated and regulatory manner, disciplinarians have often developed important models for engaging in a methodical, persistent, and well-coordinated process of knowledge production. Obviously, there are examples not only of genius within these domains but of great triumphs of scholarly breakthroughs leading to improvements in the human condition. The diverse understanding of these types of disciplinary practices empowers the bricoleur to ask compelling questions of other disciplines he or she will encounter. Such smart questions will facilitate the researcher’s capacity to make use of positive contributions of disciplines while avoiding disciplinary parochialism and domination.

As bricoleurs pursue this dialectic of disciplinarity, gaining a deep knowledge of the literature and conversations within a field, they would concurrently examine both the etymology and the critique of what many refer to as the disciplines’ arbitrary demarcations for arranging knowledge and structuring research. In a critical context, the bricoleur would develop a power literacy to facilitate his or her understanding of the nature and effects of the web of power relations underlying a discipline’s official research methodologies. Here bricoleurs would trace the ways these power dynamics shaped the knowledge produced within the disciplinary research tradition. Learning multiple lessons from their in-depth study of the discipline in particular and disciplinarity in general, the bricoleur becomes an expert on the relationships connecting cultural context, meaning making, power, and oppression within disciplinary boundaries. Their rigorous understanding of these dynamics possibly makes them more aware of the influence of such factors on the everyday practices of the discipline than those who have traditionally operated as scholars within the discipline (Freidman, 1998; Lutz, Jones, & Kendall, 1997; Morawski, 1997).

Questioning the Social Construction of Interdisciplinarity

Thus, bricoleurs operating within this dialectic of disciplinarity gain an in- depth understanding of the “process of disciplinarity,” adeptly avoiding any superficiality that might result from their interdisciplinary pursuits. At the same time, such researchers possess the insight to avoid complicity in colonized knowledge production designed to regulate and discipline. Such subtle expertise illustrates an appreciation of the complexity of knowledge work to which bricolage aspires. Understanding disciplinary processes and models of expertise while recognizing the elitist dimensions of dominant cultural knowledge technologies involves a nuanced discernment of the double-edged sword of disciplinarity. Concurrently, bricoleurs subject interdisciplinary to the same rigorous perusal. Accordingly, bricoleurs understand that interdisciplinarity is as much a social construction as disciplinarity. Just because bricolage is about interdisciplinarity, bricoleurs must not release the notion from the same form of power analysis used to explore disciplinarity.

In addition, bricoleurs must clarify what is meant by interdisciplinarity. A fuzzy concept at best, interdisciplinarity generally refers to a process where disciplinary boundaries are crossed and the analytical frames of more than one discipline are employed by the researcher. Surveying the use of the term, it quickly becomes apparent that little attention has been paid to what exactly interdisciplinarity implies for researchers. Some uses of the concept assume the deployment of numerous disciplinary methodologies in a study where disciplinary distinctions are maintained; other uses imply an integrated melding of disciplinary perspectives into a new methodological synthesis. Advocates of bricolage must consider the diverse approaches that take place in the name of interdisciplinarity and their implications for constructing the bricolage.

In light of the disciplinary implosion that has taken place over the past few decades and the “no going back” stance previously delineated, I feel no compulsion to preserve the disciplines in some pure, uncorrupted state of nature. Although there is much to learn from their histories, the stages of disciplinary emergence, growth and development, alteration, and devolution and decline, the complex view of bricolage I am presenting embraces a deep form of interdisciplinarity. A deep interdisciplinarity seeks to modify the disciplines and the view of research brought to the negotiating table constructed by the bricolage. Everyone leaves the table informed by the dialogue in a way that idiosyncratically influences the research methods they subsequently employ.

The point of the interaction is not standardized agreement as to some reductionistic notion of “the proper interdisciplinary research method” but awareness of the diverse tools in the researcher’s toolbox. The form such deep interdisciplinarity may take is shaped by the object of inquiry in question. Thus, in the bricolage, the context in which research takes place always affects the nature of the deep interdisciplinarity employed. In the spirit of the dialectic of disciplinarity, the ways these context-driven articulations of interdisciplinarity are constructed must be examined in light of the power literacy previously mentioned (Freidman, 1998; Blommaert, 1997; Pryse, 1998; Young & Yarbrough, 1993).

Bricolage as Deep Interdisciplinarity: The Synergy of Multiple Perspectives

With these disciplinary concerns in the front of our mind, I will now focus attention on the intellectual power of the bricolage. It does not seem a conceptual stretch to argue that there is a synergy that emerges in the use of different methodological and interpretive perspectives in the analysis of an artifact. Historians, for example, who are conversant with the insights of hermeneutics, will produce richer interpretations of the historical processes they encounter in their research. In the deep interdisciplinarity of the bricolage the historian takes concepts from hermeneutics and combines them with historiographical methods. What is produced is something new, a new form of hermeneutical historiography or historical hermeneutics. Whatever its name, the methodology could not have been predicted by examining historiography and hermeneutics separately, outside of the context of the historical processes under examination (Varenne, 1996). The possibilities offered by such interdisciplinary synergies are limitless.

An ethnographer who is conversant with social theory and its recent history is better equipped to transcend certain forms of formulaic ethnography that are reduced by the so-called “observational constraint” on the methodology. Using the x-ray vision of contemporary social-theoretically informed strategies of discourse analysis, poststructural psychoanalysis, and ideology-critique, the ethnographer gains the ability to see beyond the literalness of the observed. In this maneuver, the ethnographer-as-bricoleur moves to a deeper level of data analysis as he or she sees “what’s not there” in physical presence, what is not discernible by the ethnographic eye. Synergized by the interaction of ethnography and the social theoretical discourses, the resulting bricolage provides a new angle of analysis, a multidimensional perspective on a cultural phenomenon (Dicks & Mason, 1998; Foster, 1997).

Carefully exploring the relationships connecting the object of inquiry to the contexts in which it exists, the researcher constructs the most useful bricolage his or her wide knowledge of research strategies can provide. The strict disciplinarian operating in a reductionistic framework chained to the prearranged procedures of a monological way of seeing is less likely to produce frame-shattering research than the synergized bricoleur. The process at work in the bricolage involves learning from difference. Researchers employing multiple research methods are often not chained to the same assumptions as individuals operating within a particular discipline. As they study the methods of diverse disciplines, they are forced to compare not only methods but also differing epistemologies and social theoretical assumptions. Such diversity frames research orientations as particular socially constructed perspectives—not sacrosanct pathways to the truth. All methods are subject to questioning and analysis, especially in light of so many other strategies designed for similar purposes (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; Lester, 1997; Thomas, 1998).

This defamiliarization process highlights the power of the confrontation with difference to expand the researcher’s interpretive horizons. Bricolage does not simply tolerate difference but cultivates it as a spark to researcher creativity. Here rests a central contribution of the deep interdisciplinarity of the bricolage: As researchers draw together divergent forms of research, they gain the unique insight of multiple perspectives. Thus, a complex understanding of research and knowledge production prepares bricoleurs to address the complexities of the social, cultural, psychological, and educational domains. Sensitive to complexity, bricoleurs use multiple methods to uncover new insights, expand and modify old principles, and reexamine accepted interpretations in unanticipated contexts. Using any methods necessary to gain new perspectives on objects of inquiry, bricoleurs employ the principle of difference not only in research methods but in cross-cultural analysis as well. In this domain, bricoleurs explore the different perspectives of the socially privileged and the marginalized in relation to formations of race, class, gender, and sexuality (McLeod, 2000; Pryse, 1998; Young & Yarbrough, 1993).

The deep interdisciplinarity of bricolage is sensitive to multivocality and the consciousness of difference it produces in a variety of contexts. Described by Denzin and Lincoln (2000) as “multi-competent, skilled at using inter- views, observation, personal documents,” the bricoleur explores the use of ethnography, Pinarian currere, historiography, genre studies, psychoanalysis, rhetorical analysis, discourse analysis, content analysis, ad infinitum. The addition of historiography, for example, to the bricoleur’s tool kit profoundly expands his or her interpretive facility. As bricoleurs historically contextualize their ethnographies, discourse analysis, and semiotic studies, they tap into the power of etymology. Etymological insight (Kincheloe & Steinberg, 1993; Kincheloe, Steinberg, & Hinchey, 1999) involves an under- standing of the origins of the construction of social, cultural, psychological, political, economic, and educational artifacts and the ways they shape our subjectivities. Indeed, our conception of self, world, and our positionalities as researchers can only become complex and critical when we appreciate the historical aspect of its formation. With this one addition, we dramatically sophisticate the quality and depth of our knowledge work (Zammito, 1996).

Expanding The Boundaries: The Search For New Forms Of Knowledge Production

Operating as a form of deep interdisciplinarity, bricolage is unembarrassed in its effort to rupture particular ways of functioning in the established disciplines of research. One of the best ways to accomplish this goal is to include what might be termed philosophical research to the bricolage. In the same way that historiography ruptures the stability of particular disciplinary methods, philosophical research provides bricoleurs with the dangerous knowledge of the multivocal results of humans’ desire to understand, to know themselves and the world. Differing philosophical/cultural conventions have employed diverse epistemological, ontological, and cosmological assumptions as well as different methods of inquiry. Again, depending on the context of the object of inquiry, bricoleurs use their knowledge of these dynamics to shape their research design. It is not difficult to understand the epistemological contention that the types of logic, criteria for validity, and methods of inquiry used in clinical medicine as opposed to teacher effectiveness in teaching critical thinking will differ.

In making such an assertion the bricoleur is displaying philosophical/ epistemological/ontological sensitivity to the context of analysis. Such a sensitivity is a key element of the bricolage, as it brings an understanding of social theory together with an appreciation of the demands of particular contexts; this fused concept is subsequently used to examine the repertoire of methods the bricoleur can draw on and to help decide which ones are relevant to the project at hand. Practicing this mode of analysis in a variety of research situations, the bricoleur becomes increasingly adept at employing multiple methods in concrete venues. Such a historiographically and philosophically informed bricolage helps researchers move into a new, more complex domain of knowledge production where they are far more conscious of multiple layers of intersections between the knower and the known, perception and the lived world, and discourse and representation. Employing the benefits of philosophical inquiry, the bricoleur gains a new ability to account for and incorporate these dynamics into his or her research narratives (Bridges, 1997; Fischer, 1998; Madison, 1988; McCarthy, 1997).

This is what expanding the boundaries of knowledge production specifically references. In the particularities of the philosophical interactions with the empirical in a variety of contexts, bricoleurs devise new forms of rigor, new challenges to other researchers to push the methodological and interpretive envelopes. As bricoleurs study the subjective meanings that human beings make, for example, they use their philosophical modes of inquiry to understand that this phenomenological form of information has no analogue in the methods of particular formalist forms of empirical research. Thus, in an obvious example, a choice of methods is necessitated by particular epistemological and ontological conditions—epistemological and ontological conditions rarely recognized in monological forms of empirical research (Haggerson, 2000; Lee, 1997).

I want to be as specific as possible about the nature of these epistemological and ontological conditions. Although we have made progress, much of the research that is devoid of the benefits philosophical inquiry brings to the bricolage still tends to study the world as if ontologically it consists of a series of static images. Entities are often removed from the contexts that shape them, the processes of which they are a part, and the relationships and connections that structure their being-in-the-world. Such ontological orientations impose particular epistemologies, specific ways of producing knowledge about such inert entities. In this ontological context, the task of researchers is reduced, as they simply do not have to worry about contextual insights, etymological processes, and the multiple relationships that constitute the complexity of lived reality. In a reductionistic mode of research, these dynamics are irrelevant and the knowledge produced in such contexts reflects the reductionism. The bricolage struggles to find new ways of seeing and interpreting that avoid this curse and that produce thick, complex, and rigorous forms of knowledge (Karunaratne, 1997).

In this thick, complex, and rigorous context, bricoleurs in the social, cultural, psychological, and educational domains operate with a sophisticated understanding of the nature of knowledge. To be well prepared, bricoleurs must realize that knowledge is always in process, developing, culturally specific, and power-inscribed. They are attuned to dynamic relationships connecting individuals, their contexts, and their activities instead of focusing on these separate entities in isolation from one another. In this ontological framework, they concentrate on social activity systems and larger cultural processes and the ways individuals engage or are engaged by them (Blackler, 1995).

Bricoleurs follow such engagements, analyzing how the ever-changing dynamics of the systems and the processes alter the lived realities of participants; concurrently, they monitor the ways participants operate to change the systems and the processes. The complexity of such a mode of inquiry precludes the development of a step-by-step set of research procedures. Bricoleurs know that this inability to proceduralize undermines efforts to “test” the validity of their research. The researcher’s fidelity to procedure cannot simply be checked off and certified. In the complex bricolage the products of research are “evaluated.” The evaluation process draws on the same forms of inquiry and analysis initially delineated by the bricolage itself (Madison, 1988). In this context, the rigor of research intensifies at the same time the boundaries of knowledge production are stretched.

Life on the Boundaries: Facilitating the Work of the Bricoleur

The bricolage understands that the frontiers of knowledge work rest in the liminal zones where disciplines collide. Thus, in the deep interdisciplinarity of the bricolage, researchers learn to engage in a form of boundary work. Such scholarly labor involves establishing diverse networks and conferences where synergistic interactions can take place as proponents of different methodologies, students of divergent subject matters, and individuals confronted with different problems interact. In this context, scholars learn across these domains and educate intermediaries who can build bridges between various territories. As disciplinary intermediaries operating as bricoleurs facilitate this boundary work, they create conceptual and electronic links that help researchers in different domains interact. If the cutting edge of research lives at the intersection of disciplinary borders, then developing the bricolage is a key strategy in the development of rigorous and innovative research. The facilitation and cultivation of boundary work is a central element of this process.

There is nothing simple about conducting research at the interdisciplinary frontier. Many scholars report that the effort to develop expertise in different disciplines and research methodologies demands more than a casual acquaintance with the literature of a domain. In this context, there is a need for personal interaction between representatives from diverse disciplinary domains and scholarly projects to facilitate these encounters. Many researchers find it extremely difficult to make sense of “outside” fields and the more disciplines a researcher scans the harder the process becomes. If the scholar does not have access to historical dimensions of the field, the contexts that envelop the research methods used and the knowledge produced in the area, or contemporary currents involving debates and controversies in the discipline, the boundary work of the bricolage becomes exceedingly frustrating and futile. Proponents of the bricolage must help develop specific strategies for facilitating this complicated form of scholarly labor.

In this context we come to understand that a key aspect of “doing bricolage” involves the development of conceptual tools for boundary work. Such tools might include the promotion and cultivation of detailed reviews of research in a particular domain written with the needs of bricoleurs in mind. Researchers from a variety of disciplinary domains should develop information for bricolage projects. Hypertextual projects that provide conceptual matrices for bringing together diverse literatures, examples of data produced by different research methods, connective insights, and bibliographic compilations can be undertaken by bricoleurs with the help of information professionals. Such projects would integrate a variety of conceptual understandings, including the previously mentioned historical, contextual, and contemporary currents of disciplines (Friedman, 1998; Palmer, 1996).

Kellner (1995) is helpful in this context with his argument that multiperspectival approaches to research may not be very helpful unless the object of inquiry and the various methods used to study it are situated historically. In this way, the forces operating to socially construct all elements of the research process are understood, an appreciation that leads to a grasp of new relationships and connections. Such an appreciation opens new interpretive windows that lead to more rigorous modes of analysis and interpretation. This historicization of the research and the researched is an intrinsic aspect of the bricolage and the education of the bricoleur. Because learning to become a bricoleur is a lifelong process, what we are discussing here relates to the lifelong curriculum for preparing bricoleurs.

Also necessary to this boundary work and the education of the bricoleur are social-theoretical and hermeneutical understandings. Social theory alerts bricoleurs to the implicit assumptions within particular approaches to research and the ways they shape their findings. With grounding in social theory, bricoleurs can make more informed decisions about the nature of the knowledge produced in the field and how researchers discern the worth of the knowledge they themselves produce. With the benefit of hermeneutics, bricoleurs are empowered to synthesize data collected via multiple methods. In the hermeneutic process, this ability to synthesize diverse information moves the bricoleur to a more sophisticated level of meaning making (Foster, 1997; Zammito, 1996). Life on the disciplinary boundaries is never easy, but the rewards to be derived from the hard work demanded are profound.

I’ll mercifully stop here. … This is part of an expanding piece.

Blackler, F. (1995). Knowledge, knowledge work, and organizations: An overview and interpretation. Organization Studies , 16 , 6.

Blommaert, J. (1997). Workshopping: Notes on professional vision in discourse [Online]. Available: http://africana_rug.ac.be/texts/research-publications/publications_ on-line/workshopping.htm

Bridges, D. (1997). Philosophy and educational research: A reconsideration of epistemological boundaries. Cambridge Journal of Education , 27 , 2.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dicks, B., & Mason, B. (1998). Hypermedia and ethnography: Reflections on the construction of a research approach. Sociological Research Online , 3 , 3.

Fischer, F. (1998). Beyond empiricism: Policy inquiry in postpositivist perspective. Policy Studies Journal , 26 (1), 129-146.

Foster, R. (1997). Addressing epistemologic and practical issues in multimethod research: A procedure for conceptual triangulation. Advances in Nursing Education , 202 , 2.

Friedman, S. (1998). (Inter) disciplinarity and the question of the women’s studies Ph.D. Feminist Studies , 24 , 2.

Haggerson, N. (2000). Expanding curriculum research and understanding: A mytho-poetic perspective . New York: Peter Lang Publishing.

Karunaratne, V. (1997). Buddhism, science, and dialectics [Online]. Available: http://humanism.org/opinions/articles.html

Kellner, D. (1995). Media culture: Cultural studies, identity and politics between the modern and postmodern . New York: Routledge.

Kincheloe, J., & Steinberg, S. (1993). A tentative description of post-formal thinking: The critical confrontation with cognitive theory. Harvard Educational Review , 63 (3), 296-320.

Kincheloe, J., Steinberg, S., & Hinchey, P. (1999). The postformal reader: Cognition and education . New York: Falmer.

Lee, A. (1997). What is MIS? In R. Galliers & W. Currie (Eds.), Rethinking MIS . London: Oxford University Press.

Lester, S. (1997). Learning for the twenty-first century [Online]. Available: http://www.devmts.demon.co.uk/lrg21st.htm

Levi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lincoln, Y. S. (2012). Foreword. In K. Cooper & R. E. White, Qualitative research in the postmodern era, Volume I, (p. x). Dordrecht, NL: Springer.

Lutz, K., Jones, K., & Kendall, J. (1997). Expanding the praxis debate: Contributions to clinical inquiry. Advances in Nursing Science , 20 , 2.

Madison, G. (1988). The hermeneutics of postmodernity: Figures and themes . Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

McCarthy, M. (1997). Pluralism, invariance, and conflict. The Review of Metaphysics , 51 , l.

McLeod, J. (2000, June). Qualitative research as bricolage . Paper presented at the Society for Psychotherapy Research Annual Conference, Chicago.

Morawski, J. (1997). The science behind feminist research methods. Journal of Social Issues , 53 (4), 667-682.

Palmer, C. (1996). Information work at the boundaries of science: Linking library services to research practices. Library Trends , 44 (2), 165-192.

Pryse, M. (1998). Critical interdisciplinarity, women’s studies, and cross-cultural insight. NWSA Journal , 10 (1), 1-11.

Selfe, C., & Selfe, R. (1994). The politics of the interface: Power and its exercise in electronic contact zones [Online]. Available: http://www.hu.mtu.edu/~cyselfe/texts/politics. html

Thomas, G. (1998). The myth of rational research. British Educational Research Journal , 24 , 2.

Varenne, H. (1996). The social facting of education: Durkheim’s legacy. Journal of Curriculum Studies , 27 , 373-389.

Young, T., & Yarbrough, J. (1993). Reinventing sociology: Mission and methods for postmodern sociologists (Transforming Sociology Series, 154). Weidman, MI: Red Feather Institute.

Zammito, J. (1996). Historicism, metahistory, and historical practice: The historicization of the historical subject [Online]. Available: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~sprague/zammito.htm

Joe L. Kincheloe is a professor of education at the City University of New York Graduate Center in Urban Education and at Brooklyn College. The author and editor of more than 20 books, he is a well-known lecturer. His areas of research include cultural studies, pedagogy, issues of diversity, qualitative research, bricolage, interdisciplinary rigor, and research methodology. His latest book, The Sign of the Burger: McDonald’s and the Culture of Power , will be out in February from Temple University Press.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

White, R.E., Cooper, K. (2022). The Future of Qualitative Research. In: Qualitative Research in the Post-Modern Era. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85124-8_11

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85124-8_11

Published : 29 September 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-85126-2

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-85124-8

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Privacy Statement
• Planning Committee
• GC1 Sustainable Development and Climate Change
• GC2 Clean Water
• GC3 Population and Resource
• GC4 Democratization
• GC5 Global Foresight and Decision-making
• GC6 Global Convergence of IT
• GC7 Rich-Poor Gap
• GC8 Health Issues
• GC9 Education and Learning
• GC10 Peace and Conflict
• GC11 Status of Women
• GC12 Transnational Organized Crime
• GC13 Energy
• GC14 Science and Technology
• GC15 Global Ethics
• Various Studies
• Global Futures Intelligence System
• Future Work/Technology 2050
• State of the Future Index
• Real-Time Delphi
• Workshops & Training
• Presentations & Speeches
• Publications
• Internships

Futures Research Methodology — Version 3.0

Editors: Jerome C. Glenn and Theodore J. Gordon

• CD-ROM: 1300 pages
• Publisher: The Millennium Project; 3.0 edition (April 30, 2009)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0981894119
• ISBN-13: 978-0981894119
• Downloadable or CD-ROM

The largest, most comprehensive collection of internationally peer-reviewed handbook on methods and tools to explore future possibilities ever assembled in one resource.

Over half of the chapters were written by the inventor of the method or by a significant contributor to the method’s evolution.

The electronic download- contains 39 chapters totaling about 1,300 pages. Each method is treated in a separate file in word (.doc) and PDF format.

The series begins with an introductory chapter to futures research and concludes with a synthesis of methods and speculation about the future of futures research methods. The other 37 chapters cover one specific method (e.g. Futures Wheel, Scenarios) or category of methods (e.g. Systems Perspectives, Normative Forecasting).

Each of the 37 chapters contains:

• an executive overview of each method’s history,
• description of the method
• primary and alternative usages,
• strengths and weaknesses,
• uses in combination with other methods, and
• speculation about future evolution of the method.
• Some also contain appendixes with applications, links to software, and sources for further information.

Version 3.0 has not only added new chapters, it has also updated and improved the editing of the previous chapters making this version a significant improvement on the previous one.

Electronic Edition (downloadable zip file)

Price: $49.50 US dollars

Price: $49.50 US dollars + shipping

FRM 3.0 Table of Contents

1. Introduction to Futures Research Jerome C. Glenn 2. Environmental Scanning Theodore J. Gordon and Jerome C. Glenn 3. Text Mining for Technology Foresight Alan L. Porter 4. Delphi Theodore J. Gordon 5. Real-Time Delphi Theodore J. Gordon 6. The Futures Wheel Jerome C. Glenn 7. The Futures Polygon Antonio Pacinelli 8. Trend Impact Analysis Theodore J. Gordon 9. Cross-Impact Analysis Theodore J. Gordon 10. Wild Cards John Petersen and Karlheintz Steinmueller 11. Structural Analysis Jacques Arcade, Michel Godet, Francis Meunier, Fabrice Roubelat 12. The Systems Perspectives Allenna Leonard with Stafford Beer 13. Decision Modeling The Futures Group International

14. Substitution Analysis Theodore J. Gordon 15. Statistical Modeling Antonio Pacinelli 16. Technology Sequence Analysis Theodore J. Gordon 17. Morphological Analysis Tom Ritchey 18. Relevance Trees The Futures Group International and Theodore J. Gordon 19. Scenarios Jerome C. Glenn and The Futures Group International 20. A Toolbox for Scenario Planning Michel Godet 21. Interactive Scenarios Theodore J. Gordon 22. Robust Decisionmaking Robert Lempert, Steven Popper, Steve Bankes (RAND Corporation) 23. Participatory Methods Jerome C. Glenn 24. Simulation and Games Erwin Rausch with additions from Frank Catanzaro 25. Genius Forecasting, Intuition, and Vision Jerome C. Glenn 26. Prediction Markets Justin Wolfers and Justin Zitzewitz

27. Using Vision in Futures Clem Bezold 28. Normative Forecasting Joe Coates and Jerome C. Glenn 29. S&T Road Mapping Theodore J. Gordon 30. Field Anomaly Relaxation (FAR) Geoffrey R. Coyle 31. Agent Modeling (demo software) Theodore J. Gordon 32. Chaos and Non-Linear Dynamics Theodore Gordon 33. Multiple Perspective Concept Harold Linstone 34. Heuristics Modeling Sam Cole 35. Causal Layered Analysis Sohail Inayatullah 36. Personal Futures Verne Wheelwright 37. State of the Future Index Theodore J. Gordon 38. SOFI Software System Peter Yim 39. Integration, Comparisons, and Frontiers of Futures Research Methods Theodore J. Gordon and Jerome C. Glenn

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Evans D, Coad J, Cottrell K, et al. Public involvement in research: assessing impact through a realist evaluation. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2014 Oct. (Health Services and Delivery Research, No. 2.36.)

Public involvement in research: assessing impact through a realist evaluation.

Chapter 9 conclusions and recommendations for future research.

• How well have we achieved our original aim and objectives?

The initially stated overarching aim of this research was to identify the contextual factors and mechanisms that are regularly associated with effective and cost-effective public involvement in research. While recognising the limitations of our analysis, we believe we have largely achieved this in our revised theory of public involvement in research set out in Chapter 8 . We have developed and tested this theory of public involvement in research in eight diverse case studies; this has highlighted important contextual factors, in particular PI leadership, which had not previously been prominent in the literature. We have identified how this critical contextual factor shapes key mechanisms of public involvement, including the identification of a senior lead for involvement, resource allocation for involvement and facilitation of research partners. These mechanisms then lead to specific outcomes in improving the quality of research, notably recruitment strategies and materials and data collection tools and methods. We have identified a ‘virtuous circle’ of feedback to research partners on their contribution leading to their improved confidence and motivation, which facilitates their continued contribution. Following feedback from the HS&DR Board on our original application we did not seek to assess the cost-effectiveness of different mechanisms of public involvement but we did cost the different types of public involvement as discussed in Chapter 7 . A key finding is that many research projects undercost public involvement.

In our original proposal we emphasised our desire to include case studies involving young people and families with children in the research process. We recruited two studies involving parents of young children aged under 5 years, and two projects involving ‘older’ young people in the 18- to 25-years age group. We recognise that in doing this we missed studies involving children and young people aged under 18 years; in principle we would have liked to have included studies involving such children and young people, but, given the resources at our disposal and the additional resource, ethical and governance issues this would have entailed, we regretfully concluded that this would not be feasible for our study. In terms of the four studies with parental and young persons’ involvement that we did include, we have not done a separate analysis of their data, but the themes emerging from those case studies were consistent with our other case studies and contributed to our overall analysis.

In terms of the initial objectives, we successfully recruited the sample of eight diverse case studies and collected and analysed data from them (objective 1). As intended, we identified the outcomes of involvement from multiple stakeholders‘ perspectives, although we did not get as many research partners‘ perspectives as we would have liked – see limitations below (objective 2). It was more difficult than expected to track the impact of public involvement from project inception through to completion (objective 3), as all of our projects turned out to have longer time scales than our own. Even to track involvement over a stage of a case study research project proved difficult, as the research usually did not fall into neatly staged time periods and one study had no involvement activity over the study period.

Nevertheless, we were able to track seven of the eight case studies prospectively and in real time over time periods of up to 9 months, giving us an unusual window on involvement processes that have previously mainly been observed retrospectively. We were successful in comparing the contextual factors, mechanisms and outcomes associated with public involvement from different stakeholders‘ perspectives and costing the different mechanisms for public involvement (objective 4). We only partly achieved our final objective of undertaking a consensus exercise among stakeholders to assess the merits of the realist evaluation approach and our approach to the measurement and valuation of economic costs of public involvement in research (objective 5). A final consensus event was held, where very useful discussion and amendment of our theory of public involvement took place, and the economic approach was discussed and helpfully critiqued by participants. However, as our earlier discussions developed more fully than expected, we decided to let them continue rather than interrupt them in order to run the final exercise to assess the merits of the realist evaluation approach. We did, however, test our analysis with all our case study participants by sending a draft of this final report for comment. We received a number of helpful comments and corrections but no disagreement with our overall analysis.

• What were the limitations of our study?

Realist evaluation is a relatively new approach and we recognise that there were a number of limitations to our study. We sought to follow the approach recommended by Pawson, but we acknowledge that we were not always able to do so. In particular, our theory of public involvement in research evolved over time and initially was not as tightly framed in terms of a testable hypothesis as Pawson recommends. In his latest book Pawson strongly recommends that outcomes should be measured with quantitative data, 17 but we did not do so; we were not aware of the existence of quantitative data or tools that would enable us to collect such data to answer our research questions. Even in terms of qualitative data, we did not capture as much information on outcomes as we initially envisaged. There were several reasons for this. The most important was that capturing outcomes in public involvement is easier the more operational the focus of involvement, and more difficult the more strategic the involvement. Thus, it was relatively easy to see the impact of a patient panel on the redesign of a recruitment leaflet but harder to capture the impact of research partners in a multidisciplinary team discussion of research design.

We also found it was sometimes more difficult to engage research partners as participants in our research than researchers or research managers. On reflection this is not surprising. Research partners are generally motivated to take part in research relevant to their lived experience of a health condition or situation, whereas our research was quite detached from their lived experience; in addition people had many constraints on their time, so getting involved in our research as well as their own was likely to be a burden too far for some. Researchers clearly also face significant time pressures but they had a more direct interest in our research, as they are obliged to engage with public involvement to satisfy research funders such as the NIHR. Moreover, researchers were being paid by their employers for their time during interviews with us, while research partners were not paid by us and usually not paid by their research teams. Whatever the reasons, we had less response from research partners than researchers or research managers, particularly for the third round of data collection; thus we have fewer data on outcomes from research partners‘ perspectives and we need to be aware of a possible selection bias towards more engaged research partners. Such a bias could have implications for our findings; for example payment might have been a more important motivating factor for less engaged advisory group members.

There were a number of practical difficulties we encountered. One challenge was when to recruit the case studies. We recruited four of our eight case studies prior to the full application, but this was more than 1 year before our project started and 15 months or more before data collection began. In this intervening period, we found that the time scales of some of the case studies were no longer ideal for our project and we faced the choice of whether to continue with them, although this timing was not ideal, or seek at a late moment to recruit alternative ones. One of our case studies ultimately undertook no involvement activity over the study period, so we obtained fewer data from it, and it contributed relatively little to our analysis. Similarly, one of the four case studies we recruited later experienced some delays itself in beginning and so we had a more limited period for data collection than initially envisaged. Research governance approvals took much longer than expected, particularly as we had to take three of our research partners, who were going to collect data within NHS projects, through the research passport process, which essentially truncated our data collection period from 1 year to 9 months. Even if we had had the full year initially envisaged for data collection, our conclusion with hindsight was that this was insufficiently long. To compare initial plans and intentions for involvement with the reality of what actually happened required a longer time period than a year for most of our case studies.

In the light of the importance we have placed on the commitment of PIs, there is an issue of potential selection bias in the recruitment of our sample. As our sampling strategy explicitly involved a networking approach to PIs of projects where we thought some significant public involvement was taking place, we were likely (as we did) to recruit enthusiasts and, at worst, those non-committed who were at least open to the potential value of public involvement. There were, unsurprisingly, no highly sceptical PIs in our sample. We have no data therefore on how public involvement may work in research where the PI is sceptical but may feel compelled to undertake involvement because of funder requirements or other factors.

• What would we do differently next time?

If we were to design this study again, there are a number of changes we would make. Most importantly we would go for a longer time period to be able to capture involvement through the whole research process from initial design through to dissemination. We would seek to recruit far more potential case studies in principle, so that we had greater choice of which to proceed with once our study began in earnest. We would include case studies from the application stage to capture the important early involvement of research partners in the initial design period. It might be preferable to research a smaller number of case studies, allowing a more in-depth ethnographic approach. Although challenging, it would be very informative to seek to sample sceptical PIs. This might require a brief screening exercise of a larger group of PIs on their attitudes to and experience of public involvement.

The economic evaluation was challenging in a number of ways, particularly in seeking to obtain completed resource logs from case study research partners. Having a 2-week data collection period was also problematic in a field such as public involvement, where activity may be very episodic and infrequent. Thus, collecting economic data alongside other case study data in a more integrated way, and particularly with interviews and more ethnographic observation of case study activities, might be advantageous. The new budgeting tool developed by INVOLVE and the MHRN may provide a useful resource for future economic evaluations. 23

We have learned much from the involvement of research partners in our research team and, although many aspects of our approach worked well, there are some things we would do differently in future. Even though we included substantial resources for research partner involvement in all aspects of our study, we underestimated how time-consuming such full involvement would be. We were perhaps overambitious in trying to ensure such full involvement with the number of research partners and the number and complexity of the case studies. We were also perhaps naive in expecting all the research partners to play the same role in the team; different research partners came with different experiences and skills, and, like most of our case studies, we might have been better to be less prescriptive and allow the roles to develop more organically within the project.

• Implications for research practice and funding

If one of the objectives of R&D policy is to increase the extent and effectiveness of public involvement in research, then a key implication of this research is the importance of influencing PIs to value public involvement in research or to delegate to other senior colleagues in leading on involvement in their research. Training is unlikely to be the key mechanism here; senior researchers are much more likely to be influenced by peers or by their personal experience of the benefits of public involvement. Early career researchers may be shaped by training but again peer learning and culture may be more influential. For those researchers sceptical or agnostic about public involvement, the requirement of funders is a key factor that is likely to make them engage with the involvement agenda. Therefore, funders need to scrutinise the track record of research teams on public involvement to ascertain whether there is any evidence of commitment or leadership on involvement.

One of the findings of the economic analysis was that PIs have consistently underestimated the costs of public involvement in their grant applications. Clearly the field will benefit from the guidance and budgeting tool recently disseminated by MHRN and INVOLVE. It was also notable that there was a degree of variation in the real costs of public involvement and that effective involvement is not necessarily costly. Different models of involvement incur different costs and researchers need to be made aware of the costs and benefits of these different options.

One methodological lesson we learned was the impact that conducting this research had on some participants’ reflection on the impact of public involvement. Particularly for research staff, the questions we asked sometimes made them reflect upon what they were doing and change aspects of their approach to involvement. Thus, the more the NIHR and other funders can build reporting, audit and other forms of evaluation on the impact of public involvement directly into their processes with PIs, the more likely such questioning might stimulate similar reflection.

• Recommendations for further research

There are a number of gaps in our knowledge around public involvement in research that follow from our findings, and would benefit from further research, including realist evaluation to extend and further test the theory we have developed here:

• In-depth exploration of how PIs become committed to public involvement and how to influence agnostic or sceptical PIs would be very helpful. Further research might compare, for example, training with peer-influencing strategies in engendering PI commitment. Research could explore the leadership role of other research team members, including research partners, and how collective leadership might support effective public involvement.
• More methodological work is needed on how to robustly capture the impact and outcomes of public involvement in research (building as well on the PiiAF work of Popay et al. 51 ), including further economic analysis and exploration of impact when research partners are integral to research teams.
• Research to develop approaches and carry out a full cost–benefit analysis of public involvement in research would be beneficial. Although methodologically challenging, it would be very useful to conduct some longer-term studies which sought to quantify the impact of public involvement on such key indicators as participant recruitment and retention in clinical trials.
• It would also be helpful to capture qualitatively the experiences and perspectives of research partners who have had mixed or negative experiences, since they may be less likely than enthusiasts to volunteer to participate in studies of involvement in research such as ours. Similarly, further research might explore the (relatively rare) experiences of marginalised and seldom-heard groups involved in research.
• Payment for public involvement in research remains a contested issue with strongly held positions for and against; it would be helpful to further explore the value research partners and researchers place on payment and its effectiveness for enhancing involvement in and impact on research.
• A final relatively narrow but important question that we identified after data collection had finished is: what is the impact of the long periods of relative non-involvement following initial periods of more intense involvement for research partners in some types of research, particularly clinical trials?

Included under terms of UK Non-commercial Government License .

• Cite this Page Evans D, Coad J, Cottrell K, et al. Public involvement in research: assessing impact through a realist evaluation. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2014 Oct. (Health Services and Delivery Research, No. 2.36.) Chapter 9, Conclusions and recommendations for future research.
• PDF version of this title (4.3M)

In this Page

Other titles in this collection.

• Health Services and Delivery Research

Recent Activity

• Conclusions and recommendations for future research - Public involvement in rese... Conclusions and recommendations for future research - Public involvement in research: assessing impact through a realist evaluation

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

Research Methods | Definitions, Types, Examples

Research methods are specific procedures for collecting and analyzing data. Developing your research methods is an integral part of your research design . When planning your methods, there are two key decisions you will make.

First, decide how you will collect data . Your methods depend on what type of data you need to answer your research question :

• Qualitative vs. quantitative : Will your data take the form of words or numbers?
• Primary vs. secondary : Will you collect original data yourself, or will you use data that has already been collected by someone else?
• Descriptive vs. experimental : Will you take measurements of something as it is, or will you perform an experiment?

Second, decide how you will analyze the data .

• For quantitative data, you can use statistical analysis methods to test relationships between variables.
• For qualitative data, you can use methods such as thematic analysis to interpret patterns and meanings in the data.

Table of contents

Methods for collecting data, examples of data collection methods, methods for analyzing data, examples of data analysis methods, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about research methods.

Data is the information that you collect for the purposes of answering your research question . The type of data you need depends on the aims of your research.

Qualitative vs. quantitative data

Your choice of qualitative or quantitative data collection depends on the type of knowledge you want to develop.

For questions about ideas, experiences and meanings, or to study something that can’t be described numerically, collect qualitative data .

If you want to develop a more mechanistic understanding of a topic, or your research involves hypothesis testing , collect quantitative data .

You can also take a mixed methods approach , where you use both qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Primary vs. secondary research

Primary research is any original data that you collect yourself for the purposes of answering your research question (e.g. through surveys , observations and experiments ). Secondary research is data that has already been collected by other researchers (e.g. in a government census or previous scientific studies).

If you are exploring a novel research question, you’ll probably need to collect primary data . But if you want to synthesize existing knowledge, analyze historical trends, or identify patterns on a large scale, secondary data might be a better choice.

Descriptive vs. experimental data

In descriptive research , you collect data about your study subject without intervening. The validity of your research will depend on your sampling method .

In experimental research , you systematically intervene in a process and measure the outcome. The validity of your research will depend on your experimental design .

To conduct an experiment, you need to be able to vary your independent variable , precisely measure your dependent variable, and control for confounding variables . If it’s practically and ethically possible, this method is the best choice for answering questions about cause and effect.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Your data analysis methods will depend on the type of data you collect and how you prepare it for analysis.

Data can often be analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. For example, survey responses could be analyzed qualitatively by studying the meanings of responses or quantitatively by studying the frequencies of responses.

Qualitative analysis methods

Qualitative analysis is used to understand words, ideas, and experiences. You can use it to interpret data that was collected:

• From open-ended surveys and interviews , literature reviews , case studies , ethnographies , and other sources that use text rather than numbers.
• Using non-probability sampling methods .

Qualitative analysis tends to be quite flexible and relies on the researcher’s judgement, so you have to reflect carefully on your choices and assumptions and be careful to avoid research bias .

Quantitative analysis methods

Quantitative analysis uses numbers and statistics to understand frequencies, averages and correlations (in descriptive studies) or cause-and-effect relationships (in experiments).

You can use quantitative analysis to interpret data that was collected either:

• During an experiment .
• Using probability sampling methods .

Because the data is collected and analyzed in a statistically valid way, the results of quantitative analysis can be easily standardized and shared among researchers.

If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Chi square test of independence
• Statistical power
• Descriptive statistics
• Degrees of freedom
• Pearson correlation
• Null hypothesis
• Double-blind study
• Case-control study
• Research ethics
• Data collection
• Hypothesis testing
• Structured interviews

Research bias

• Hawthorne effect
• Unconscious bias
• Recall bias
• Halo effect
• Self-serving bias
• Information bias

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

In mixed methods research , you use both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods to answer your research question .

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population . Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research. For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

In statistics, sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population.

The research methods you use depend on the type of data you need to answer your research question .

• If you want to measure something or test a hypothesis , use quantitative methods . If you want to explore ideas, thoughts and meanings, use qualitative methods .
• If you want to analyze a large amount of readily-available data, use secondary data. If you want data specific to your purposes with control over how it is generated, collect primary data.
• If you want to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables , use experimental methods. If you want to understand the characteristics of a research subject, use descriptive methods.

Methodology refers to the overarching strategy and rationale of your research project . It involves studying the methods used in your field and the theories or principles behind them, in order to develop an approach that matches your objectives.

Methods are the specific tools and procedures you use to collect and analyze data (for example, experiments, surveys , and statistical tests ).

In shorter scientific papers, where the aim is to report the findings of a specific study, you might simply describe what you did in a methods section .

In a longer or more complex research project, such as a thesis or dissertation , you will probably include a methodology section , where you explain your approach to answering the research questions and cite relevant sources to support your choice of methods.

Is this article helpful?

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples.

• What Is a Research Design | Types, Guide & Examples
• Data Collection | Definition, Methods & Examples

More interesting articles

• Between-Subjects Design | Examples, Pros, & Cons
• Cluster Sampling | A Simple Step-by-Step Guide with Examples
• Confounding Variables | Definition, Examples & Controls
• Construct Validity | Definition, Types, & Examples
• Content Analysis | Guide, Methods & Examples
• Control Groups and Treatment Groups | Uses & Examples
• Control Variables | What Are They & Why Do They Matter?
• Correlation vs. Causation | Difference, Designs & Examples
• Correlational Research | When & How to Use
• Critical Discourse Analysis | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Cross-Sectional Study | Definition, Uses & Examples
• Descriptive Research | Definition, Types, Methods & Examples
• Ethical Considerations in Research | Types & Examples
• Explanatory and Response Variables | Definitions & Examples
• Explanatory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples
• Exploratory Research | Definition, Guide, & Examples
• External Validity | Definition, Types, Threats & Examples
• Extraneous Variables | Examples, Types & Controls
• Guide to Experimental Design | Overview, Steps, & Examples
• How Do You Incorporate an Interview into a Dissertation? | Tips
• How to Do Thematic Analysis | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates
• How to Write a Strong Hypothesis | Steps & Examples
• Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria | Examples & Definition
• Independent vs. Dependent Variables | Definition & Examples
• Inductive Reasoning | Types, Examples, Explanation
• Inductive vs. Deductive Research Approach | Steps & Examples
• Internal Validity in Research | Definition, Threats, & Examples
• Internal vs. External Validity | Understanding Differences & Threats
• Longitudinal Study | Definition, Approaches & Examples
• Mediator vs. Moderator Variables | Differences & Examples
• Mixed Methods Research | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Multistage Sampling | Introductory Guide & Examples
• Naturalistic Observation | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Operationalization | A Guide with Examples, Pros & Cons
• Population vs. Sample | Definitions, Differences & Examples
• Primary Research | Definition, Types, & Examples
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research | Differences, Examples & Methods
• Quasi-Experimental Design | Definition, Types & Examples
• Questionnaire Design | Methods, Question Types & Examples
• Random Assignment in Experiments | Introduction & Examples
• Random vs. Systematic Error | Definition & Examples
• Reliability vs. Validity in Research | Difference, Types and Examples
• Reproducibility vs Replicability | Difference & Examples
• Reproducibility vs. Replicability | Difference & Examples
• Sampling Methods | Types, Techniques & Examples
• Semi-Structured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Simple Random Sampling | Definition, Steps & Examples
• Single, Double, & Triple Blind Study | Definition & Examples
• Stratified Sampling | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Structured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• Survey Research | Definition, Examples & Methods
• Systematic Review | Definition, Example, & Guide
• Systematic Sampling | A Step-by-Step Guide with Examples
• Textual Analysis | Guide, 3 Approaches & Examples
• The 4 Types of Reliability in Research | Definitions & Examples
• The 4 Types of Validity in Research | Definitions & Examples
• Transcribing an Interview | 5 Steps & Transcription Software
• Triangulation in Research | Guide, Types, Examples
• Types of Interviews in Research | Guide & Examples
• Types of Research Designs Compared | Guide & Examples
• Types of Variables in Research & Statistics | Examples
• Unstructured Interview | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is a Case Study? | Definition, Examples & Methods
• What Is a Case-Control Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Conceptual Framework? | Tips & Examples
• What Is a Controlled Experiment? | Definitions & Examples
• What Is a Double-Barreled Question?
• What Is a Focus Group? | Step-by-Step Guide & Examples
• What Is a Likert Scale? | Guide & Examples
• What Is a Prospective Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is a Retrospective Cohort Study? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Action Research? | Definition & Examples
• What Is an Observational Study? | Guide & Examples
• What Is Concurrent Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Content Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Convenience Sampling? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Convergent Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Criterion Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Data Cleansing? | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is Deductive Reasoning? | Explanation & Examples
• What Is Discriminant Validity? | Definition & Example
• What Is Ecological Validity? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Ethnography? | Definition, Guide & Examples
• What Is Face Validity? | Guide, Definition & Examples
• What Is Non-Probability Sampling? | Types & Examples
• What Is Participant Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Peer Review? | Types & Examples
• What Is Predictive Validity? | Examples & Definition
• What Is Probability Sampling? | Types & Examples
• What Is Purposive Sampling? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Qualitative Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Qualitative Research? | Methods & Examples
• What Is Quantitative Observation? | Definition & Examples
• What Is Quantitative Research? | Definition, Uses & Methods

What is your plagiarism score?

Futures Research

Futures research can be defined as a systematic study of possible future events and circumstances. As a field of study, futures evolved in 1950s. Futures research is different from forecasting in a way that the former has a forward orientation and looks ahead, rather that backwards, and is not as mathematical as forecasting.

It can be argued that highly dynamic nature of the contemporary global marketplace is making is difficult to conduct quality futures studies. For example, it is now evident that COVID-19 global pandemic has compromised findings of many futures studies. This is because no researcher could foresee the occurrence of extent of implications of pandemic on global business and economics.

Disadvantages of futures research are straightforward – no event or situation can be forecasted in an accurate and complete manner. Nevertheless, futures studies may offer a substantial advantage. Specifically, although futures studies are not able to produce totally accurate and complete information about the future, some researched information about the future is better than no information at all when engaging in decision making for long-term perspective.

There is wide range of techniques available that can be used to conduct futures studies. The following table illustrates types and techniques of the most popular futures techniques.

 Futures research methods techniques

Source:  Millenium Project

The nature of decision-making using the results of futures studies can be approached from four alternative perspectives:

1. Values perspective categorises forecasted outcome of events and occurrences as good or bad.  Accordingly, value perspective tends to be highly subjective due to value differences amongst individuals.

2. Rational perspective relates to selection of an alternative amongst decision options guided by the extent to which each alternative meets certain criteria.

3. Judgement heuristics is associated with tendency towards risk-taking and relying on intuition when engaging in decision making.

4. Cognitive science perspective to decision making relies on inductive process of thought and taking decisions as a result of inductive analysis by individuals, as well as, related computer programs.

If you decide to conduct a futures research for your dissertation you will have to choose a specific method from table above. You will need to discuss advantages and disadvantages of the method selected and also provide rationale for the choice.

My e-book,  The Ultimate Guide to Writing a Dissertation in Business Studies: a step by step assistance  contains discussions of theory and application of research philosophy. The e-book also explains all stages of the  research process  starting from the  selection of the research area  to writing personal reflection. Important elements of dissertations such as  research philosophy ,  research approach ,  research design ,  methods of data collection  and  data analysis  are explained in this e-book in simple words.

[1] Source: Millenium Project

Research vs. development: Where is the moat in AI?

• Share on Facebook
• Share on LinkedIn

VB Transform 2024 returns this July! Over 400 enterprise leaders will gather in San Francisco from July 9-11 to dive into the advancement of GenAI strategies and engaging in thought-provoking discussions within the community. Find out how you can attend here .

Research and development (R&D) is really a chimera — the mythological creature with two distinctive heads on one body. 

Researchers have strong academic backgrounds and regularly publish papers, apply for patents and work on ideas that are likely to come to fruition over the course of years. Research departments deliver long-term value, discovering the future by asking tough questions and finding innovative answers. 

Developers are valued (and hired) for their practical skills and problem solving abilities. Development teams work in rapid cycles focused on producing clear and measurable results. While critics of development teams claim they are simply packaging and repackaging products, it is actually the nuts and bolts of a product that drives adoption. 

If R&D was a basketball team, the players would come from the development department. The research team would spend their time asking whether they can alter the rules of the game and whether basketball is even the best game for them to play. 

VB Transform 2024 Registration is Open

Join enterprise leaders in San Francisco from July 9 to 11 for our flagship AI event. Connect with peers, explore the opportunities and challenges of Generative AI, and learn how to integrate AI applications into your industry. Register Now

The shift in AI barriers and value drivers

We’re seeing a shift in the AI space. Even as S&P or Fortune 500 companies are still focused on hiring AI researchers, the rules of the game are changing. 

And as the rules change, the rest of the game (including players and tactics) is changing, too. Consider any large software company. Their core assets — those that they have spent millions of man-hours building and which are valued in billions on their financial statements — aren’t homes, buildings, factories or supply chains. Rather, they are enormous lumps of code that used to take decades to replicate. Not anymore. AI-powered auto coding is the equivalent of robots that build new homes in a few hours, at 1% of a home’s typical cost. 

Suddenly, we’re seeing barriers to entry and value drivers have shifted dramatically. This means that the AI moat — the metaphoric barrier that protects a business from competition — has shifted, too. 

Today, a long term and defensible business moat comes from the product, users and surrounding capabilities rather than research breakthroughs. The best sports teams in the world may have been those who came up with innovative strategies — but it is their community, brand and product offering that keeps them at the top of their league. 

Where will AI dollars deliver good returns?

OpenAI, Google, Meta , Anthropic, Cohere, Mosaic Salesforce and at least a dozen others have hired, at enormous cost, large research teams to build better LLMs (large language models) — in other words, to figure out the new rules of the game. These invested dollars are arguably of crucial importance to society, yet netting patents and prizes does not ensure strong return on investment (ROI) for an AI startup. 

Today, it is the development side, which turns new LLMs into products, that will make the difference. Whether it’s a new start-up building something that was once impossible, or a current company that integrates this new technology to offer something exceptional — long term and lasting value is being created by new AI capabilities in three core domains:  

• Infrastructure for AI : As AI is adopted across organizations, companies need to adapt their infrastructure to accommodate evolving computational requirements. This starts with chips (dedicated or otherwise) and continues through the data network layers that allow AI data to flow throughout the organization. Similar to how Snowflake rose to deal with cloud computation, we envision others following a similar path in the organizational AI stack. 
• Utility : We increasingly see a narrowing gap between LLMs learning and poaching talent from others. On the other hand, in large organizations, the challenge is not choosing best-of-breed tech, but applying this technology to specific use cases. Similar to Figma in front end design, we believe there is room for companies that allow many of the millions of coders who are not AI specialists to easily harness the benefits of LLMs . 
• Vertically-focused LLM products : Naturally, when the rules of the game change, new products become possible. Similar to the way Uber could only work once smartphones were prolific, we imagine that creative founders will enhance our world with new products that beforehand were not possible.

The bottom line

The key to success in AI has moved from groundbreaking research to building practical applications. While research paves the way for future advancements, development translates those ideas into value.

The new AI moat lies in exceptional AI-powered products, not in groundbreaking research. Companies that excel in building user-friendly tools, infrastructure for smooth AI integration and entirely new LLM-powered products will be the future winners. As the focus shifts from defining the game’s rules to mastering them, the race is on to develop the most impactful applications of AI.

Judah Taub is managing partner at Hetz Ventures .

DataDecisionMakers

Welcome to the VentureBeat community!

DataDecisionMakers is where experts, including the technical people doing data work, can share data-related insights and innovation.

If you want to read about cutting-edge ideas and up-to-date information, best practices, and the future of data and data tech, join us at DataDecisionMakers.

You might even consider  contributing an article  of your own!

Read More From DataDecisionMakers

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Methodology

Definition:

Research Methodology refers to the systematic and scientific approach used to conduct research, investigate problems, and gather data and information for a specific purpose. It involves the techniques and procedures used to identify, collect , analyze , and interpret data to answer research questions or solve research problems . Moreover, They are philosophical and theoretical frameworks that guide the research process.

Structure of Research Methodology

Research methodology formats can vary depending on the specific requirements of the research project, but the following is a basic example of a structure for a research methodology section:

I. Introduction

• Provide an overview of the research problem and the need for a research methodology section
• Outline the main research questions and objectives

II. Research Design

• Explain the research design chosen and why it is appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Discuss any alternative research designs considered and why they were not chosen
• Describe the research setting and participants (if applicable)

III. Data Collection Methods

• Describe the methods used to collect data (e.g., surveys, interviews, observations)
• Explain how the data collection methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or instruments used for data collection

IV. Data Analysis Methods

• Describe the methods used to analyze the data (e.g., statistical analysis, content analysis )
• Explain how the data analysis methods were chosen and why they are appropriate for the research question(s) and objectives
• Detail any procedures or software used for data analysis

V. Ethical Considerations

• Discuss any ethical issues that may arise from the research and how they were addressed
• Explain how informed consent was obtained (if applicable)
• Detail any measures taken to ensure confidentiality and anonymity

VI. Limitations

• Identify any potential limitations of the research methodology and how they may impact the results and conclusions

VII. Conclusion

• Summarize the key aspects of the research methodology section
• Explain how the research methodology addresses the research question(s) and objectives

Research Methodology Types

Types of Research Methodology are as follows:

Quantitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of numerical data using statistical methods. This type of research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Qualitative Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection and analysis of non-numerical data such as words, images, and observations. This type of research is often used to explore complex phenomena, to gain an in-depth understanding of a particular topic, and to generate hypotheses.

Mixed-Methods Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that combines elements of both quantitative and qualitative research. This approach can be particularly useful for studies that aim to explore complex phenomena and to provide a more comprehensive understanding of a particular topic.

Case Study Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves in-depth examination of a single case or a small number of cases. Case studies are often used in psychology, sociology, and anthropology to gain a detailed understanding of a particular individual or group.

Action Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves a collaborative process between researchers and practitioners to identify and solve real-world problems. Action research is often used in education, healthcare, and social work.

Experimental Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the manipulation of one or more independent variables to observe their effects on a dependent variable. Experimental research is often used to study cause-and-effect relationships and to make predictions.

Survey Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the collection of data from a sample of individuals using questionnaires or interviews. Survey research is often used to study attitudes, opinions, and behaviors.

Grounded Theory Research Methodology

This is a research methodology that involves the development of theories based on the data collected during the research process. Grounded theory is often used in sociology and anthropology to generate theories about social phenomena.

Research Methodology Example

An Example of Research Methodology could be the following:

Research Methodology for Investigating the Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Reducing Symptoms of Depression in Adults

Introduction:

The aim of this research is to investigate the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. To achieve this objective, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted using a mixed-methods approach.

Research Design:

The study will follow a pre-test and post-test design with two groups: an experimental group receiving CBT and a control group receiving no intervention. The study will also include a qualitative component, in which semi-structured interviews will be conducted with a subset of participants to explore their experiences of receiving CBT.

Participants:

Participants will be recruited from community mental health clinics in the local area. The sample will consist of 100 adults aged 18-65 years old who meet the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder. Participants will be randomly assigned to either the experimental group or the control group.

Intervention :

The experimental group will receive 12 weekly sessions of CBT, each lasting 60 minutes. The intervention will be delivered by licensed mental health professionals who have been trained in CBT. The control group will receive no intervention during the study period.

Data Collection:

Quantitative data will be collected through the use of standardized measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7). Data will be collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at a 3-month follow-up. Qualitative data will be collected through semi-structured interviews with a subset of participants from the experimental group. The interviews will be conducted at the end of the intervention period, and will explore participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Data Analysis:

Quantitative data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-tests, and mixed-model analyses of variance (ANOVA) to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis to identify common themes and patterns in participants’ experiences of receiving CBT.

Ethical Considerations:

This study will comply with ethical guidelines for research involving human subjects. Participants will provide informed consent before participating in the study, and their privacy and confidentiality will be protected throughout the study. Any adverse events or reactions will be reported and managed appropriately.

Data Management:

All data collected will be kept confidential and stored securely using password-protected databases. Identifying information will be removed from qualitative data transcripts to ensure participants’ anonymity.

Limitations:

One potential limitation of this study is that it only focuses on one type of psychotherapy, CBT, and may not generalize to other types of therapy or interventions. Another limitation is that the study will only include participants from community mental health clinics, which may not be representative of the general population.

Conclusion:

This research aims to investigate the effectiveness of CBT in reducing symptoms of depression in adults. By using a randomized controlled trial and a mixed-methods approach, the study will provide valuable insights into the mechanisms underlying the relationship between CBT and depression. The results of this study will have important implications for the development of effective treatments for depression in clinical settings.

How to Write Research Methodology

Writing a research methodology involves explaining the methods and techniques you used to conduct research, collect data, and analyze results. It’s an essential section of any research paper or thesis, as it helps readers understand the validity and reliability of your findings. Here are the steps to write a research methodology:

• Start by explaining your research question: Begin the methodology section by restating your research question and explaining why it’s important. This helps readers understand the purpose of your research and the rationale behind your methods.
• Describe your research design: Explain the overall approach you used to conduct research. This could be a qualitative or quantitative research design, experimental or non-experimental, case study or survey, etc. Discuss the advantages and limitations of the chosen design.
• Discuss your sample: Describe the participants or subjects you included in your study. Include details such as their demographics, sampling method, sample size, and any exclusion criteria used.
• Describe your data collection methods : Explain how you collected data from your participants. This could include surveys, interviews, observations, questionnaires, or experiments. Include details on how you obtained informed consent, how you administered the tools, and how you minimized the risk of bias.
• Explain your data analysis techniques: Describe the methods you used to analyze the data you collected. This could include statistical analysis, content analysis, thematic analysis, or discourse analysis. Explain how you dealt with missing data, outliers, and any other issues that arose during the analysis.
• Discuss the validity and reliability of your research : Explain how you ensured the validity and reliability of your study. This could include measures such as triangulation, member checking, peer review, or inter-coder reliability.
• Acknowledge any limitations of your research: Discuss any limitations of your study, including any potential threats to validity or generalizability. This helps readers understand the scope of your findings and how they might apply to other contexts.
• Provide a summary: End the methodology section by summarizing the methods and techniques you used to conduct your research. This provides a clear overview of your research methodology and helps readers understand the process you followed to arrive at your findings.

When to Write Research Methodology

Research methodology is typically written after the research proposal has been approved and before the actual research is conducted. It should be written prior to data collection and analysis, as it provides a clear roadmap for the research project.

The research methodology is an important section of any research paper or thesis, as it describes the methods and procedures that will be used to conduct the research. It should include details about the research design, data collection methods, data analysis techniques, and any ethical considerations.

The methodology should be written in a clear and concise manner, and it should be based on established research practices and standards. It is important to provide enough detail so that the reader can understand how the research was conducted and evaluate the validity of the results.

Applications of Research Methodology

Here are some of the applications of research methodology:

• To identify the research problem: Research methodology is used to identify the research problem, which is the first step in conducting any research.
• To design the research: Research methodology helps in designing the research by selecting the appropriate research method, research design, and sampling technique.
• To collect data: Research methodology provides a systematic approach to collect data from primary and secondary sources.
• To analyze data: Research methodology helps in analyzing the collected data using various statistical and non-statistical techniques.
• To test hypotheses: Research methodology provides a framework for testing hypotheses and drawing conclusions based on the analysis of data.
• To generalize findings: Research methodology helps in generalizing the findings of the research to the target population.
• To develop theories : Research methodology is used to develop new theories and modify existing theories based on the findings of the research.
• To evaluate programs and policies : Research methodology is used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs and policies by collecting data and analyzing it.
• To improve decision-making: Research methodology helps in making informed decisions by providing reliable and valid data.

Purpose of Research Methodology

Research methodology serves several important purposes, including:

• To guide the research process: Research methodology provides a systematic framework for conducting research. It helps researchers to plan their research, define their research questions, and select appropriate methods and techniques for collecting and analyzing data.
• To ensure research quality: Research methodology helps researchers to ensure that their research is rigorous, reliable, and valid. It provides guidelines for minimizing bias and error in data collection and analysis, and for ensuring that research findings are accurate and trustworthy.
• To replicate research: Research methodology provides a clear and detailed account of the research process, making it possible for other researchers to replicate the study and verify its findings.
• To advance knowledge: Research methodology enables researchers to generate new knowledge and to contribute to the body of knowledge in their field. It provides a means for testing hypotheses, exploring new ideas, and discovering new insights.
• To inform decision-making: Research methodology provides evidence-based information that can inform policy and decision-making in a variety of fields, including medicine, public health, education, and business.

Advantages of Research Methodology

Research methodology has several advantages that make it a valuable tool for conducting research in various fields. Here are some of the key advantages of research methodology:

• Systematic and structured approach : Research methodology provides a systematic and structured approach to conducting research, which ensures that the research is conducted in a rigorous and comprehensive manner.
• Objectivity : Research methodology aims to ensure objectivity in the research process, which means that the research findings are based on evidence and not influenced by personal bias or subjective opinions.
• Replicability : Research methodology ensures that research can be replicated by other researchers, which is essential for validating research findings and ensuring their accuracy.
• Reliability : Research methodology aims to ensure that the research findings are reliable, which means that they are consistent and can be depended upon.
• Validity : Research methodology ensures that the research findings are valid, which means that they accurately reflect the research question or hypothesis being tested.
• Efficiency : Research methodology provides a structured and efficient way of conducting research, which helps to save time and resources.
• Flexibility : Research methodology allows researchers to choose the most appropriate research methods and techniques based on the research question, data availability, and other relevant factors.
• Scope for innovation: Research methodology provides scope for innovation and creativity in designing research studies and developing new research techniques.

Research Methodology Vs Research Methods

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Dissertation – Format, Example and Template

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Problem – Examples, Types and Guide

Figures in Research Paper – Examples and Guide

Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing...

Research Questions – Types, Examples and Writing...

• Open access
• Published: 29 May 2024

Exploring the use of body worn cameras in acute mental health wards: a mixed-method evaluation of a pilot intervention

• Una Foye 1 , 2 ,
• Keiran Wilson 1 , 2 ,
• Jessica Jepps 1 , 2 ,
• James Blease 1 ,
• Ellen Thomas 3 ,
• Leroy McAnuff 3 ,
• Sharon McKenzie 3 ,
• Katherine Barrett 3 ,
• Lilli Underwood 3 ,
• Geoff Brennan 1 , 2 &
• Alan Simpson 1 , 2  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  681 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

344 Accesses

12 Altmetric

Metrics details

Body worn cameras (BWC) are mobile audio and video capture devices that can be secured to clothing allowing the wearer to record some of what they see and hear. This technology is being introduced in a range of healthcare settings as part of larger violence reduction strategies aimed at reducing incidents of aggression and violence on inpatient wards, however limited evidence exists to understand if this technology achieves such goals.

This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of BWCs on two inpatient mental health wards, including the impact on incidents, the acceptability to staff and patients, the sustainability of the resource use and ability to manage the use of BWCs on these wards.

The study used a mixed-methods design comparing quantitative measures including ward activity and routinely collected incident data at three time-points before during and after the pilot implementation of BWCs on one acute ward and one psychiatric intensive care unit, alongside pre and post pilot qualitative interviews with patients and staff, analysed using a framework based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

Results showed no clear relationship between the use of BWCs and rates or severity of incidents on either ward, with limited impact of using BWCs on levels of incidents. Qualitative findings noted mixed perceptions about the use of BWCs and highlighted the complexity of implementing such technology as a violence reduction method within a busy healthcare setting Furthermore, the qualitative data collected during this pilot period highlighted the potential systemic and contextual factors such as low staffing that may impact on the incident data presented.

This study sheds light on the complexities of using such BWCs as a tool for ‘maximising safety’ on mental health settings. The findings suggest that BWCs have a limited impact on levels of incidents on wards, something that is likely to be largely influenced by the process of implementation as well as a range of contextual factors. As a result, it is likely that while BWCs may see successes in one hospital site this is not guaranteed for another site as such factors will have a considerable impact on efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility.

Peer Review reports

Body worn cameras (BWC) are mobile audio and video capture devices that can be secured to clothing allowing the wearer to record some of what they see and hear. In England, these have been introduced in the National Health Service (NHS) as part of a violence reduction strategy [ 1 ] which emphasises the reduction of aggression and violence against staff. The NHS Staff Survey 2022 found that 14.7% of NHS staff had experienced at least one incident of physical violence from patients, relatives or other members of the public in the previous 12 months. Violent attacks on staff were found to contribute to almost half of staff illness [ 2 ]. Levels of violence against staff working in mental health trusts remain much higher than other types of healthcare providers [ 3 ]. Numerous reports internationally highlight the increased risks faced by staff working in psychiatric care [ 4 ], though studies have reported that both ward staff and mental health patients experience violence and feeling unsafe on inpatient wards [ 5 , 6 ].

Body worn cameras have been in use for over a decade within law enforcement, where they hoped to provide transparency and accountability within use-of-force incidents and in the event of citizen complaints against police [ 7 ]. It was believed that video surveillance would help identify integral problems within the organisation, improve documentation of evidence, reduce use-of-force incidents, improve police-community relations, and provide training opportunities for officers [ 8 ]. However, a recent extensive international systematic review by Lum et al. [ 9 ], found that despite the successes noted in early evaluations, the way BWCs are currently used by police may not substantially affect most officer or citizen behaviours. Irrespective of these findings, other public services such as train operators have been implementing BWCs for security purposes, with reductions reported in the number of assaults on railway staff [ 10 ].

A recent systematic review of BWC use in public sector services established that there is a poor evidence base supporting the use of BWCs in the reduction of violence and aggression [ 11 ]. Yet, we are seeing a swift increase in the use of BWCs in mental health settings with that aim, with few studies conducted on the use of BWC technology in inpatient mental health wards, and even fewer studies exploring staff or patients’ views. Two evaluations conducted in England reported mixed results with both increases and decreases in violence and aggression found, and variation between types of wards. There is some suggestion of a reduction in more serious incidents and the use of restraint, but quality of evidence is low [ 12 , 13 ].

The use of BWCs in mental healthcare settings for safety and security remains a contentious topic due to the lack of evidence regarding the influence that such technology has on preventing violence and aggression and the complex philosophical and ethical issues raised, particularly where many patients may lack capacity and/or are detained under mental health legislation [ 14 ]. Additionally, there are concerns that BWCs may be used as a ‘quick fix’ for staff shortages rather than addressing the wider systemic and resourcing issues facing services [ 15 ]. With little independent evaluation of body-worn cameras in mental health settings, many of these concerns remain unanswered. There is also limited understanding of this technology from an implementation perspective. Therefore, in this study we aimed to conduct an independent evaluation of the introduction of BWCs as a violence reduction intervention on two inpatient mental health wards during a six-month pilot period to explore the impact of using the technology, alongside an exploration of the facilitators and barriers to implementation.

Research aim(s)

To evaluate the implementation of BWCs on two inpatient mental health wards, including the impact on incidents, the acceptability to staff and patients, the sustainability of the resource use and ability to manage the use of BWCs on these wards.

Patient and public involvement

The research team included a researcher and independent consultant, each with lived experience of mental health inpatient care. In addition, we recruited and facilitated a six member Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP). This group was made up of patients and carers, some of whom had experienced the use of BWCs. Members were of diverse ethnic backgrounds and included four women and two men. The LEAP provided guidance and support for the research team in developing an understanding of the various potential impacts of the use of BWCs on inpatient mental health wards. Members contributed to the design of the study, development of the interview schedule, practice interviews prior to data collection on the wards, and supported the analysis and interpretation of the data, taking part in coding sessions to identify themes in the interview transcripts. The LEAP met once a month for two hours and was chaired by the Lived Experience Research Assistant and Lived Experience Consultant. Participants in the LEAP were provided with training and paid for their time.

The pilot introduction of the body worn cameras was conducted within a London mental health Trust consisting of four hospital sites with 17 acute wards. The research team were made aware of extensive preparatory work and planning that was conducted at a directorate and senior management level prior to camera implementation, including lived experience involvement and consultation, and the development of relevant policies and protocols inclusive of a human rights assessment and legal consultation.

The pilot period ran from 25th April to 25th October 2022. Reveal (a company who supply BWCs nationally across the UK) provided the Trust with 12 Calla BWCs for a flat fee that covered use of the cameras, cloud-based storage of footage, management software, and any support/maintenance required during the pilot period. Cameras were introduced to two wards based on two hospital sites, with six cameras provided to each of the wards on the same date. Training on using the BWCs was provided by the BWC company to staff working on both wards prior to starting the pilot period. Ward one was a 20-bed male acute inpatient ward, representing the most common ward setting where cameras have been introduced. Ward two was a ten-bed male Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU), representing smaller and more secure wards in which patients are likely to present as more unwell and where there are higher staff to patient ratios.

To answer our research questions, we used a mixed-methods design [ 16 ]. Using this design allowed us to investigate the impact of implementing BWCs in mental health settings on a range of quantitative and qualitative outcomes. This mixed methods design allows the study to statistically evaluate the effectiveness of using BWCs in these settings on key dependent variables (i.e., rates of violence and aggression, and incidents of conflict and containment) alongside qualitatively exploring the impact that the implementation of such technology has on patients and staff.

To ensure that the study was able to capture the impact and effect of implementation of the cameras, a repeated measures design was utilised to capture data at three phases on these wards:

Pre-pilot data: data prior of the implementation of the BWCs (quantitative and qualitative data).

Pilot period data: data collected during the six-month pilot period when BWCs were implemented on the wards (quantitative and qualitative data).

Post-pilot: data collected after the pilot period ended and cameras had been removed from the wards (quantitative data only).

Quantitative methods

Quantitative data was collected at all three data collection periods:

Pre-period: Data spanning six months prior to the implementation of BWCs (Nov 21 to May 22).

Pilot period: Data spanning the six months of the Trusts pilot period of using BWCs on the wards (June 22 to Nov 22).

Post-pilot: Data spanning the six months following the pilot period, when BWCs had been removed (Dec 22 to May 23).

Quantitative measures

To analyse the impact of BWC implementation, we collected two types of incident data related to violence and aggression and use of containment measures, including BWCs. Combined, these data provide a view of a wide range of incidents and events happening across the wards prior to, during, and after the implementation and removal of the BWCs.

The patient-staff conflict checklist

The Patient-staff Conflict Checklist (PCC-SR) [ 17 ] is an end of shift report that is completed by nurses to collate the frequency of conflict and containment events. This measure has been used successfully in several studies on inpatient wards [ 18 , 19 , 20 ].The checklist consists of 21 conflict behaviour items, including physical and verbal aggression, general rule breaking (e.g., smoking, refusing to attend to personal hygiene), eight containment measures (e.g., special observation, seclusion, physical restraint, time out), and staffing levels. In tests based on use with case note material, the PCC-SR has demonstrated an interrater reliability of 0.69 [ 21 ] and has shown a significant association with rates of officially reported incidents [ 22 ].

The checklist was revised for this study to include questions related to the use of BWCs ( e.g., how many uses of BWCs happened during the shift when a warning was given and the BWC was not used; when a warning was given and the BWC was used; when the BWC was switched on with no warning given ) in order to provide insight into how the cameras were being used on each ward (see appendix 1). Ward staff were asked to complete the checklist online at the end of each shift.

Routinely collected incident data (via datix system)

To supplement the PCC-SR-R, we also used routinely collected incident data from both wards for all three data collection phases. This data is gathered as part of routine practice by ward staff members via the Datix system Datix [ 23 ] is a risk management system used widely across mental health wards and Trusts in the UK to gather information on processes and errors. Previous studies have utilised routinely collect data via this system [ 24 , 25 ]. Incidents recorded in various Datix categories were included in this study (see Table  1 ). Incidents were anonymised before being provided to the research team to ensure confidentiality.

Routinely collected data included:

Recorded incidents of violence and aggression.

Recorded use of restrictive practices including seclusion, restraint, and intra-muscular medication/rapid tranquilisations.

Patient numbers.

Staffing levels.

Numbers of staff attending BWC training.

Quantitative data analysis

Incident reports.

Incident reports retrieved from Datix were binary coded into aggregate variables to examine violence and aggression, self-harm, and other conflict as outlined in Table  1 . Multivariate analyses of variance (MANOVA) were used to identify differences in type of incident (violence against person, violence against object, verbal aggression, self-harm, conflict) for each ward. MANOVA was also used to examine differences in incident outcomes (severity, use of restrictive practice, police involvement) across pre-trial, trial, and post-trial periods for each ward. Incident severity was scored by ward staff on a four-point scale (1 = No adverse outcome, 2 = Low severity, 3 = Moderate severity, 4 = Severe). Use of restrictive practice and police involvement were binary coded for presence or absence. Analyses were conducted using SPSS [ 26 ].

Patient-staff conflict checklist shift-report – revised (PCC-SR-R; )

Data were condensed into weeks for analysis rather than shifts to account for variability in PCC-SR-R submission by shift. Linear regressions assessed the relationship between BWC use and incident outcome (severity, use of restrictive practice, police involvement).

Qualitative methods

We used semi-structured qualitative interviews to explore participants’ experiences of BWCs on the ward to understand the impact of their use as well as to identify any salient issues for patients, staff and visitors that align with the measures utilised within the quantitative aspect of this study. These interviews were conducted at two time points: pre-pilot and at the end of the six-month pilot period.

Sample selection, eligibility, and recruitment

Convenience sampling was used to recruit staff and patients on wards. Researchers approached ward managers to distribute information sheets to staff, who shared that information with patients. Staff self-selected to participate in the study by liaising directly with the research team. Patients that were identified as close to discharge and having capacity to consent were approached by a clinical member of the team who was briefed on the study inclusion criteria (see Table  2 ). The staff member spoke with the patient about the study and provided them with a copy of the information sheet to consider. If patients consented, a member of the research team approached the participant to provide more information on the study and answer questions. After initial contact with the research team, participants were given a 24-hour period to consider whether they wanted to participate before being invited for an interview.

Participants were invited to take part in an interview within a private space on the ward. Interviews were scheduled for one hour with an additional 15 min before and after to obtain informed consent and answer any questions. Participation was voluntary and participants were free to withdraw at any time. To thank patients for their time, we offered a £10 voucher following the interview. Interviews were audio-recorded and saved to an encrypted server. Interview recordings were transcribed by an external company, and the research team checked the transcripts for accuracy and pseudonymised all participants. All transcripts were allocated a unique ID number and imported to MicroSoft Excel [ 27 ] for analysis.

Qualitative data analysis

Qualitative data were analysed using a framework analysis [ 28 ] informed by implementation science frameworks. Our coding framework used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) [ 29 ], which is comprised of five major domains including: Intervention Characteristics, Implementation Processes, Outer Setting, Inner Setting, and Characteristics of the Individual. Each domain consists of several constructs that reflect the evidence base of the types of factors that are most likely to influence implementation of interventions. The CFIR is frequently used to design and conduct implementation evaluations and is commonly used for complex health care delivery interventions to understand barriers and facilitators to implementation. Based on its description, the CFIR is an effective model to address our research question, particularly given the complexity of the implementation of surveillance technology such as BWCs in this acute care setting.

The initial analytic stage was undertaken by eight members of the study team with each researcher charting data summaries onto the framework for each of the interviews they had conducted on MicroSoft Excel [ 27 ]. Sub-themes within each broad deductive theme from our initial framework were then derived inductively through further coding and collaborative discussion within the research team, inclusive of Lived Experience Researcher colleagues. Pseudonyms were assigned to each participant during the anonymisation of transcripts along with key identifiers to provide context for illustrative quotes (e.g., P = patient, S = staff, A = acute ward, I = Intensive Care, Pre = pre-BWC implementation interview, Post = Post BWC implementation interview).

All participants gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Health Research Authority: London - Camden & Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee (IRAS Project ID 322,268, REC Reference 23/LO/0337).

Quantitative results

Exploring how body worn cameras were used during the pilot period.

Analysis of the PCC-SR-R provides information about how the BWCs were used on a day-to-day basis during the pilot period. Out of 543 total shift reports completed, BWC use was reported 50 times, indicating that BWCs were used on less than 10% of shifts overall; 78% of those deployments were on the Acute ward (see Figure 1 ). Overall, the majority of deployments happened as activations without a warning being given ( n  = 30, 60% of activations), 19 times the BWC was deployed with a warning but the camera was not activated (38%), and only one was the camera activated without a warning being given (2%).

BWC use by ward per week of pilot (no data available before week 6 on Ward 1)

According to the PCC-SR-R, a total of 227 incidents of aggression occurred during the pilot period across both wards (see Table  3 ). Overall, there were small statistically significant correlations between BWC usage and certain types of conflict, aggression, and restrictive practice. Results found that BWC use was positively correlated with verbal aggression and use of physical restraint. BWC use was moderately positively correlated with verbal aggression ( r  = .37, p  < .001). This indicates that BWCs were more likely to be used in incidents involving verbal aggression, which do not tend to be documented in Datix. Similarly, BWC use was moderately positively correlated with physical restraint ( r  = .31, p  < .001) indicating that they were also more likely to be used alongside physical restraint.

Exploring the impact of BWCs utilising routinely collected ward data

Acute ward results.

Routine data collected via Datix records were used to examine differences in frequency of conflict and aggression, incident severity, and use of containment measures before, during, and after introduction of BWCs on each trial ward (see Table  4 ).

There was no effect of trial period on incident type ( F (10, 592) = 1.703, p  = .077, Wilk’s Λ = 0.945), meaning there was no discernible difference in the type of incidents that occurred (E.g., verbal aggression, physical aggression) before, during, and after the pilot phase.

Incident outcomes

There was an effect of trial period on incident outcomes ( F (6, 596) = 10.900, p  < .001, Wilk’s Λ = 0.812). Incident severity was statistically significantly higher in the trial and post-trial periods compared to the pre-trial period. Use of restrictive practice was significantly lower in the post-trial period compared to the pre-trial and trial period. Police involvement was also lower in the post-trial period compared to the pre-trial and trial periods (see Table  5 ).

Results for the psychiatric intensive care unit

There was an effect of trial period on incident type ( F (10, 490) = 4.252, p  < .001, Wilk’s Λ = 0.847). Verbal aggression was statistically significantly higher in the post-trial period compared to the pre and trial periods. Self-harm was statistically significantly higher in the trial period compared to the pre-trial and post-trial periods. There were no differences in violence against a person ( p  = .162), violence against an object or conflict behaviour (see Table  4 ).

There was a statistically significant difference in incident outcome across the trial periods ( F (6, 494) = 12.907, p  < .001, Wilk’s Λ = 0.747). There was no difference in incident severity or police involvement. However, use of restrictive practice was statistically significantly higher in the pre-trial period, reducing in the test period, and reducing further in the post-trial period (see Table  5 ).

Qualitative findings

A total of 22 participants took part in interviews: five patients and 16 staff members. During the pre-pilot interviews a total of nine staff took part (five in the acute ward, four in the PICU ward) and two patients (both from the acute ward). After the pilot period, a total of eight staff took part (four from each ward) and three patients (all from the acute ward). Table  6 includes a full description of participants.

Below we have presented the key themes aligning to the five core CFIR categories of Intervention Characteristics, Characteristics of Individuals, The Process of Implementation, the Inner Setting, and The Outer Setting (see Table  7 ).

Intervention characteristics

Design and usability of wearing a bwc on the ward.

When discussing the use of the BWCs, staff noted a range of design issues related to the cameras that they said impacted on their use and acceptance of the cameras. This included the nature of the camera pulling on clothing necklines (a particular issue for female staff working on male wards), and overheating causing discomfort and irritation to skin, challenges with infection control, as well as the issue of cameras in a mental health setting where they can be easily grabbed, thrown and broken during an incident. Staff often cited these design issues as related to the lack of proactive use of the cameras on the wards.

There were issues around the devices getting overheated or about it going on your clothing, it pulls down the top… we had one person who was leading on it, whenever he was around, of course, the camera was being used, but if he wasn’t there, people weren’t as proactive in using the camera. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

There were also issues with staff forgetting to wear the cameras, forgetting to switch them on during incidents, and forgetting to charge them at the end of the shift, reducing the potential use of the cameras by other staff. These were perceived as key logistical issues prior to the pilot and were reported as issues at the end of the pilot by several staff on the wards.

The practicalities of will they actually turn it on in those sorts of incidents, I don’t know. Just little stuff as well, like if they don’t put it back on the docking station, so you think you’re charging it for next shift but then it’s not charged and the battery is dead, that’s one less camera to use, so little stuff. Jamal (m), Staff, A, Pre.

In relation to usability, staff noted that the cameras were small and easy to use given their simple single switch interface. It was felt that not having to upload and manage the data themselves made cameras more user friendly and usable by staff members. Protocols put into place such as signing the cameras in and out, and allocation for use during shifts were likened to procedures in place for other security measures therefore the implementation of this for the BWCs was viewed as easy for many staff.

It’s just like the ASCOM alarms that we wear. There’s a system to sign in and sign out, and that’s it. Alice (f), Staff, A, Pre.

While staff were generally positive about the usability of the cameras, some were cautious of with concerns for those less confident with technology.

… you have to be conscious that there’s some people – it’s quite easy to use, but I can say that because I’m alright using devices and all that but there’s some that are older age or not that familiar with using devices that may struggle with using it… they’re feeling a bit anxious and a bit scared, if they’re not familiar with it then they won’t use it. Jamal (m), Staff, A, Pre.

Evidence strength and quality: do BWCs change anything?

There were conflicting reports regarding the potential benefits of using BWCs on the wards, with both staff and patients reporting mixed perceptions as to whether the cameras might reduce violence and aggression. In the pre-pilot interviews, some staff reported feeling that the BWCs may have a positive impact on reducing physical violence.

I think it’s going to reduce violence and aggression on the ward…I don’t think they’ll want to punch you…they might be verbally abusive but in terms of physical that might reduce. Sarah (f), Staff, I, Pre.

Patients however noted that the cameras might hold staff to account of their own behaviours and therefore may improve care, however they felt that this impact would wear off after the first few months after which people might forget about the cameras being there.

Now they’ve got the body cams, it’s going to be a lot of changes. They’ll think, ‘Ooh well he’s on tape’. So, it might do something to their conscience, they actually start to listen to patients… until the novelty wears off and it might go back to square one again. Ian (m), Patient, A, Pre.

One staff member suggested that incident rates had reduced following introduction of the BWCs, but they remained unsure as to whether this was due to the cameras, reflecting that violence and aggression on wards can be related to many factors.

I know our violence and aggression has reduced significantly since the start of the cameras pilot… I don’t know, because obviously wearing the camera’s one thing, but if they weren’t in use, I don’t know maybe just the presence of the camera made a difference. But yeah, it’s hard to tell. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

In contrast, several staff reported that they had seen limited evidence for such changes.

I used it yesterday. He was aggressive and I used it, but he even when I was using [it] he doesn’t care about the camera… it didn’t make any difference… It doesn’t stop them to do anything, this camera does not stop them to do anything. Abraham (m), Staff, I, Post.

Some staff suggested that in some circumstances the cameras increased patient agitation and created incidents, so there was a need to consider whether the BWCs were going to instigate aggression in some circumstances.

There has been with a few patients because they will threaten you. They will tell you, ‘if you turn it on, I’m gonna smash your head in’. So incidents like that, I will not turn it on… Yeah, or some of them will just tell you, ‘if you come close by, I’m going to pull that off your chest’. So things like that, I just stay back. Ada (f), Staff, A, Post.

One rationale for a potential lack of effectiveness was noted by both staff and patients and was related to the levels of acute illness being experienced by patients which meant that for many they were too unwell to have insight into their own actions or those of staff switching on the cameras.

We’ve had instances where patients are so unwell that they just don’t care. You switch on the camera, whether you switch it on or not, it doesn’t really change the behaviour. ‘All right, okay, whatever switch it on’. They’re so unwell, they’re not really understanding. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post. It might make [staff] feel safer as a placebo effect, but I don’t think it would necessarily make them safer… I think the people that are likely to attack a member of staff are crazy enough that they’re not gonna even consider the camera as a factor. Harry (m), Patient, A, Pre.

This lack of evidence that the cameras were necessarily effective in reducing incident rates or severity of incidents may have had an impact on staff buy-in and the use of the cameras as a result. One staff member reflected that having feedback from senior management about the impact and evidence would have been useful during the pilot period to inform ward staff whether the cameras were influencing things or not.

Staff want feedback. I don’t think we’ve had any since we’ve had the cameras… it would be nice to get feedback from, I don’t know, whoever is watching it, and stuff like that. Ada (f), Staff, A, Post.

Relative advantage: are BWCs effective and efficient for the ward?

Due to a combination of personal beliefs related to BWCs, the lack of evidence of their impact on violence and aggression, and other elements of care and culture on the wards, a number of staff and patients explored alternative interventions and approaches that may be more beneficial than BWCs. Both staff and patients suggested that Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) as an intervention that provided the transparency of using cameras and video footage but with an independent perspective. This was felt by many to remove the bias that could be introduced in BWC use as the video capture didn’t require staff control of the filming.

I feel like [BWCs] puts all the power and trust into the hands of the staff and I feel that it would be better to have CCTV on the ward because CCTV is neutral. Harry (m), Patient, A, Pre. I have control over that [BWC recording] … It kind of gives that split as well between staff and patients. You can tell me or I can tell you when to switch it on. Whereas I feel like a CCTV camera is there all the time. Nobody’s asking to switch it on. It’s there. If you wanted to review the footage you can request it, anyone can request to view the footage for a legitimate reason. Whereas the camera can come across as if you’re threatening. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

In addition, some participants reflected that the nature and design of BWCs meant that unless staff were present for an incident it wouldn’t be captured, whereas CCTV has the advantage of being always present.

If there’s CCTV, then it’s the same thing, you get me. Like, if its body worn cameras that people can always do things away from staff. They can always go down to that corridor to have their fight or go to the side where staff ain’t gonna see them to have their fight, but with CCTV you can’t do that. Elijah (m), Patient, A, Post.

In addition to exploring technological and video-based interventions, many staff noted that the key tool to violence reduction had to be the use of de-escalation skills, noting that the use of communication and positive relationships had to be the primary tool before other interventions such as BWCs or CCTV.

We do a lot of verbal de-escalation. So we got our destress room now still open. That has a punch bag, and it’s got sensory tiles, and the aim and hope is that when people do get frustrated, because we’re all human. We all get annoyed at anything or many little things in life. There is the aim that they go into that room and start punching the bag instead of property and damaging furniture. But we also are working really hard on verbal de-escalation and actually trying to listen to patients and talk to them before anything else. And that’s helped a lot. And between this kind of shared, or role modelling, where while we’re showing staff, actually even spending an extra 20 min is okay. If it means you’re not going to end up having to restrain a patient. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

By using communication skills and de-escalation techniques skilfully, some staff felt there was no need to utilise the BWCs. One concern with the introduction of the BWCs for staff was that the use of this technology may negatively impact on trust and relationships and the use of de-escalation.

Some situations I feel like it can make a situation worse sometimes… I think a lot of situations can be avoided if you just talk with people…. Trying to find out why they’re angry, trying to just kind of see it from their point of view, understand them… I think maybe additional training for verbal de-escalation is needed first. Patrick (m), Staff, A, Post.

Characteristics of individuals

Staff and patients’ knowledge and beliefs about the intervention.

Overall, there were mixed views among both staff and patients as to whether cameras would reduce incidents, prior to and after the pilot period. When considering the possible impact on violence and aggressive incidents there was a view among staff that there was the need for a nuanced and person-centred view.

All the patients that come in, they’re different you know. They have different perceptions; they like different things… everyone is different. So, it just depends. We might go live, and then we have good feedback because the patients they are open and the understand why we have it, and then as they get discharged and new patients come in it might not go as well. It just depends. Serene (f), Staff, A, Pre.

As a result of the desire to be person-centred in the use of such interventions, one staff member noted that they weighed-up such consequences for the patient before using the BWC and would make decisions not to use the camera where they thought it may have a negative impact.

Actually, with this body worn camera, as I did mention, if a patient is unwell, that doesn’t, the patient will not have the capacity to I mean, say yes, you cannot just put it on like that. Yeah, I know it’s for evidence, but when something happens, you first have to attend to the patient. You first have to attend to the patient before this camera is, for me. Ruby (f), Staff, I, Post.

Some staff questioned the existing evidence and theories as to why BWCs work to reduce incidents, and instead noted that for some people it will instigate an incident, while others may be triggered by a camera.

I’m on the fence of how that is going to work because I know the evidence is that by telling a patient ‘look if you keep escalating I’m gonna have to turn this on’, but I know several of our patients would kind of take that as a dare and escalate just to spite so that you would turn it on. Diana (f), Staff, A, Pre.

In contrast, some staff felt the cameras helped them feel safer on wards due to transparency of footage as evidence for both staff and patients.

They [staff] need to use it for protection, for recording evidence, that type of thing… They can record instances for later evidence. Yeah, for them as well. Safer for them and for patients because you can also have the right to get them to record, because a patient might be in the wrong but sometimes it may be the staff is in the wrong position. And that’s achieving safety for patients as well. Yeah, I think it works both ways. Dylan (m), Patient, A, Post.

Positive buy-in was also related to the potential use of the intervention as a training, learning or reflective tool for staff to improve practice and care and promote positive staff behaviour.

If you know that your actions might be filmed one way or the other, that would make me to step up your behaviour to patients… if you know that your actions can be viewed, if the authority wants to, then you behave properly with patients so I think that will improve the quality of the care to patient. Davide (m), Staff, I, Pre.

While there were some positive attitudes towards the cameras, there remained considerable concerns among participants regarding the transparency of camera use to collate evidence in relation to incidents as it was widely noted that the cameras remain in staff control therefore there is an issue in relation to bias and power.

I do think my gut would say that it wouldn’t necessarily be well received. Because also I think people feel like prisoners in here, that’s how some of the patients have described their experience, so in terms of the power dynamic and also just – I think that can make one feel a bit, even worse, basically, you know? Leslie (m), Staff, A, Pre.

These issues lead to staff reporting they didn’t want to wear the camera.

I’d feel quite uncomfortable wearing one to be honest. Leslie (m), Staff, A, Pre.

The staff control of the cameras had a particular impact on patient acceptability of the intervention as it led to some patients viewing BWCs as being an intervention for staff advantage and staff safety, thus increasing a ‘them and us’ culture and leading to patient resistance to the cameras. This was particularly salient for those with prior negative experiences of police use of cameras or mistrust in staff.

I feel like the fact that the body worn cameras is gonna be similar to how the police use them, if a staff member has negative intent toward a patient, they would be able to instigate an incident and then turn the camera on and use the consequences of what they’ve instigated to expect restraint or injection or whatever else might happen. So, I feel like it would be putting all the power and trust into the hands of the staff and I feel that it would be better to have CCTV on the ward because CCTV is neutral. Whereas, the body worn camera, especially with some of the personality conflicts/bad attitudes, impressions I’ve had from certain members of staff since I’ve been here, I feel like body worn cameras might be abused in that way possible. Harry (m), Patient, A, Pre.

Perceived unintended consequences and impact on care

Prior to the implementation there were concerns from staff that the introduction of BWCs could have consequences beyond the intended use of reducing violence and aggression, unintentionally affecting a range of factors that may impact on the overall delivery of care. There was a key concern regarding the potential negative impact that cameras may have for patients who have paranoia or psychosis as well as for those who may have prior traumatic experiences of being filmed.

It might have negative impacts on these patients because I’m thinking about kind of patients with schizophrenia and things like that who already have paranoid delusions, thinking that people are after them, thinking that people are spying on them, people are watching them, and then seeing kind of cameras around. It might have negative impacts on them. Tayla (f), Staff, I, Pre. When I was admitted I was going through psychosis… I don’t want to be filmed and things like that. So you just see a camera, a guy with a camera on, you are like, are you filming me? Elijah (m), Patient, A, Post.

There was also a considerable concern among both staff and patients that the use of cameras would have a negative impact on the therapeutic relationship between staff and patients. This was felt to be related to the implication that the cameras enhanced a ‘them and us’ dynamic due to the power differential that staff controlling the cameras can create, likened to policing and criminalisation of patients. With the potential of a negative impact on relationships between staff and patients, staff suggested they may be disinclined to use BWCs if it would stop patients speaking to them or approaching them if they needed support.

Yeah, I think it would probably damage [the therapeutic relationship] because I think what’s probably quite helpful is things that maybe create less of a power difference. I think to some extent, [the BWC] might hinder that ability. Like for example imagine going to a therapist and them just like ‘I’ve got this camera in the corner of the room and it’s gonna be filming our session and just in case – or like, just in case I feel that you might get aggressive with me’. Um, I don’t think that’s going to help the therapeutic relationship! Jamal (m), Staff, A, Pre. When you get body worn cameras on there, the relationship as well between staff and patients, is just gonna instantly change because you’re looking like police! Elijah (m), Patient, A, Post.

In contrast, a minority of staff felt that the presence of cameras may improve relationships as they provide transparency of staff behaviour and would encourage staff to behave well and provide high quality care for patients.

It will also help how, improve the way we look at the patients… because if you know that your actions might be filmed one way or the other, that would make me to step up your behaviour you know… you behave properly with patients so I think that will improve the quality of the care to patient. More efficiently, more caring to patient. Davide (m), Staff, I, Pre.

The process of implementation

Planning: top-down implementation.

Staff perceived that BWC implementation directives had been given by senior management or policy stakeholders whom they felt viewed the process from a position of limited understanding due to a lack of ‘frontline’ mental health service experience. This led to a lack of faith amongst staff, and a perception that funds were being misspent.

They sit up there, they just roll it out and see how it works, how it goes. They waste a whole lot of money, millions or whatever, thousands of pounds in it, and then they see that ‘Oh, it’s not gonna work’. They take it back and all of that. Before coming out with it, you need to come speak to us… they just sit up there drinking tea and coffee, and then they’re just like, Oh, yeah, well, let’s do it this way…come stay with these people, work with them, for just I give you a 12 h shift, stay with them. Richard (m), Staff, I, Post.

This was exacerbated when staff felt there was a lack of consultation or explanation.

we don’t always get the ins and outs of certain things…We know that the cameras are coming in and stuff like that, but you know, and obviously it’s gone through every avenue to make sure that it’s fine. But then sometimes we don’t always know the ins and outs to then explain to people why we have the cameras. Patrick (m), Staff, A, Post.

It was also highlighted that due to multiple initiatives being implemented and directives handed down in parallel, staff felt negative towards interventions more widely, with the BWCs being ‘ just another thing to do’ , adding to workload for staff and reducing enthusiasm to use the cameras.

it’s not just to do with the camera, I just think there’s lots of changes happening at once, and there’s loads of new things being constantly introduced that people are just thinking oh it’s another thing. I think that’s what it is more than the camera itself. Alice (f), Staff, A, Pre.

Execution: training, Use and Ward Visibility

Overall, there was a lack of consistency amongst staff in their understanding of the purpose and processes of using the BWCs on the wards.

What do you do, do you record every single thing or, I don’t know. Do you record like, if a patient said, I want to talk to you, confidential, you go sit in a room, do you record things like those or is it just violence and aggression? Ada (f), Staff, A, Post.

The lack of clarity regarding the purpose of the intervention and the appropriate use of the cameras was felt to impact staffs’ attitudes and acceptance of using them and contributed to a lack of transparency or perhaps trust regarding the use of any subsequent video footage.

I think if the importance of the recording was explained a bit more…and how it would improve things, I think people would use it more… that’s why I don’t think it’s always used sometimes… if you’re not sure why some of it’s important, then you’re not going to see the value…I think if you’re gonna keep with them, it’s about updating the training, teaching staff when to use it, then where does that information go? How does that look in terms of improving? Just a bit of transparency, I think. But when you don’t know certain things it’s a bit hard to get behind something or back it, you know? Patrick (m), Staff, A, Post.

The lack of information about the purpose and processes related to the intervention was also seen among patients, with most patients noting that they hadn’t received information about the cameras during their admissions.

No information at all. I don’t think any of the patients know about it. Toby (m), Patient, A, Post.

While training was provided it was widely felt that it was insufficient to provide understanding about the purpose of the cameras or the more in-depth processes beyond operational aspects such as charging and docking. Several staff interviewed were unaware of the training, while others noted that they had an informal run-through by colleagues rather than anything formal.

What training are you talking about?… I wasn’t here, so I was taught by my colleague. I mean, from what I was taught, to operate the camera, and to give a warning to the patient that you’re going to use the camera. Nevis (f), Staff, A, Post.

Longer training with further details beyond operational use was felt to be needed by staff.

I think the training should have to be longer, even if it’s like an hour or something… Like what situations deem the camera to be… more information on the cameras, when to use it, why it’s used, and I think if the importance of the recording was explained a bit more and what it was doing and how that recording would go and how it would improve things. Patrick (m), Staff, A, Post.

Furthermore, there was a need for training to be on a rolling basis given the use of bank staff who were not trained to use the cameras or to understand the proper processes or purpose of using the BWCs, which could leave them vulnerable to misuse or abuse.

We have bank staff [who aren’t trained] so they say ‘I don’t know how to use that camera you are giving me’. Nevis (f), Staff, A, Post.

The inner setting

Ward context: acceptance of violence and aggression is part of the job.

It was widely believed by staff that the nature of working on a mental health ward included accepting that violence and aggression was part of the job. This was not seen as an acceptance of violence but more that the job was providing care for individuals who are mentally unwell, and confusion, fear, frustration and aggression can be part of that. As a result, there was an ambivalence among some staff that the introduction of cameras would change this.

I think like in this line of work, there’s always that potential for like risky behaviours to happen. I’m not sure if putting the camera on will make much difference. Patrick (m), Staff, A, Post.

Staff noted that because of the nature of the job, staff are used to managing these situations and they understood that it was part of the job; therefore, it was unlikely that they would record everything that on paper might be considered an incident.

There’s also enough things that happen here, so I don’t think they would record [the incidents] because it’s just another day here. You know what I’m saying… [staff] can just say, ‘Stop, go back to your room and leave it at that and that kind of be the end of it’. Dylan (m), Patient, A, Post. We are trained for it. Eveline (f), Staff, I, Pre.

This acceptance that incidents are a hazard of mental healthcare was linked to staff’s acknowledgment that many factors make up the complexity of violence and aggression including the nature of individual patients, acuity levels, ward atmosphere, staffing levels, access to activities, leave and outside space. The interplay of multiple factors creates a context in which frustrations and incidents are likely, thus become part of the everyday and ‘normal’ life on the ward for staff and patients alike.

I feel like, you know, how in GP services you say, zero tolerance to abusive language, or any kind of harassment. I don’t think there is that on a psychiatric ward you are kind of expected to take all the abuse and just get on with it. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

With staff reported having a higher threshold for these behaviours it was perceived that this was likely to impact on the efficiency of the intervention as staff would be less likely to consider a situation as violent but more ‘ part of the job’ .

Reactive nature of the ward and incidents

Most participants noted that the ward context is always changing with people being admitted and discharged, with daily staff changes and wider turnover of staff, so things are never static and can change at any point. This reflects the dynamic nature of the ward which creates a complex moving picture that staff need to consider and react to.

[the atmosphere] it’s very good at the moment. If you had asked me this two weeks ago, I would say, ‘Oh, my gosh’. But it changes… The type of patient can make your whole ward change… it depends on the client group we have at the time. Nevis (f), Staff, A, Post.

Staff noted that a key limitation of using the cameras to reduce incidents was the reactive nature of the environment and care being provided. This was felt to impact on the feasibility and use of the cameras as staff noted that they often react to what is happening rather than thinking to ‘ put the camera on first ’. It was felt by staff with experience of reacting to incidents that the failure to use BWCs during these processes were linked to staff’s instincts and training to focus on patients as a priority.

Say for instance, you’re in the office, and two patients start fighting, or a patient attacks someone and, all you’re thinking about is to go there to stop the person. You’re not thinking about putting on any camera. You understand? So sometimes it’s halfway through it, somebody might say, ‘Has anybody switched the camera on’? And that’s the time you start recording… If something happens immediately, you’re not thinking about the camera at that time, you’re just thinking to just go, so yeah. Nevis (f), Staff, A, Post.

Incidents happen quickly and often surprise staff, therefore staff react instantly so are not thinking about new processes such as recording on the cameras as this would slow things down or is not in the reactive nature needed by staff during such incidents.

When you’re in the middle of an incident and your adrenaline’s high, you’re focusing on the incident itself. It’s very difficult for you to now remember, remind yourself to switch on the camera because you’re thinking, patient safety, staff safety, who’s coming to relieve you? What’s going on? Who’s at the door? Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

In addition, the need for an immediate response meant that it was felt that by the time staff remember to, or have the chance to, switch the camera on it was often too late.

Sometimes in the heat of moments and stuff like that, or if the situation’s happening, sometimes you don’t always think to, you know, put your camera on. Patrick (m), Staff, A, Post.

Outer setting

Resources: staffing.

Issues related to staffing were highlighted by several participants as a key problem facing mental health wards thus leading to staff having higher workloads, and higher rates of bank and agency staff being used on shift and feeling burnt-out.

Out of all the wards I’ve been on I’d say this is the worst. It’s primarily because the staff are overworked…it seems like they spend more time doing paperwork than they do interacting with the patients. Harry (m), Patient, A, Pre. We’re in a bit of a crisis at the minute, we’re really, really understaffed. We’re struggling to cover shifts, so the staff are generally quite burnt out. We’ve had a number of people that have just left all at once, so that had an impact… Staff do get frustrated if they’re burnt out from lack of staff and what have you. Alice (f), Staff, A, Pre.

It was noted by one participant that the link of a new intervention with extra workload was likely to have a negative impact on its acceptability due to these increasing demands.

People automatically link the camera to then the additional paperwork that goes alongside it. It’s like, ‘Oh god, if we do this, we’ve got to do that’, and that could play a part. Petra (f), Staff, A, Post.

One staff member noted that the staffing issue meant there were more likely to be bank staff on wards so the care of patients may be affected as temporary staff may be less able to build meaningful therapeutic relationships.

So obviously there is the basic impact on safety of not having adequate staffing, but then there’s the impact of having a lot of bank staff. So obviously when you have permanent staff they get to know the patients more, we’re able to give them the more individualised care that we ideally should be giving them, but we can’t do that with bank staff. Diana (f), Staff, A, Pre.

It was also suggested that staffing levels and mix often made it more difficult to provide activities or facilitate escorted leave which can lead to patients feeling frustrated and becoming more aggressive.

So you know there is enough staff to facilitate the actual shift, so you know when there’s less staff like you say you’ve got people knocking at the door, but then you don’t have staff to take people out on leave straight away, that all has a rippling effect! Serene (f), Staff, A, Pre.

Wider systemic issues

Overall, there was a concern that the introduction of BWCs would not impact on wider, underlying factors that may contribute to frustration, aggression and incidents on wards. Providing a more enhanced level of care and better addressing the needs of patients was felt to be central to helping people but also reducing the frustration that patients feel when on the ward.

… for violence and aggression, [focus on] the mental health side of things like therapy and psychology should be compulsory. It shouldn’t be something you apply for and have to wait three or four weeks for. I think every person should, more than three or four weeks even, months even… we need psychology and therapists. That’s what will stop most violence, because psychologists and a therapist can edit the way that they speak to people because they’ve been given that skill depending on the way the person behaves. So that’s what we need regularly… not like all this dancing therapy, yoga therapy. That’s a person, that you come and you actually sit down and talk through your shit with them. That will help! Elijah (m), Patient, A, Post. There’s a lack of routine and I think there’s a lack of positive interaction between the patient and the staff as well. The only time you interact with a member of staff is if you’re hassling them for something, you have to hassle for every little thing, and it becomes a sort of, frustration inducing and like I’m a very calm person, but I found myself getting very fucking angry, to be honest, on this ward just because out of pure frustration… there’s bigger problems than body worn cameras going on. Harry (m), Patient, A, Pre.

Staff agreed that there was a need to invest in staff and training rather than new technologies or innovations as it is staff and their skills behind the camera.

It’s not the camera that will do all of that. It’s not making the difference. It’s a very good, very beautiful device, probably doing its job in its own way. But it’s more about investing in the staff, giving them that training and making them reflect on every day-to-day shift. Richard (m), Staff, I, Post.

There was felt to be a need to support staff more in delivering care within wards that can be challenging and where patients are unwell to ensure that staff feel safe. While in some circumstances the cameras made some staff feel safer, greater support from management would be more beneficial in making staff feel valued.

In this study exploring the implementation and use of body-worn cameras on mental health wards, we employed two methods for collecting and comparing data on incidents and use of containment measures, including BWCs, on one acute ward and one psychiatric intensive care unit. We found no clear relationship between the use of BWCs and rates or severity of incidents on either ward. While BWCs may be used when there are incidents of both physical and verbal aggression, results indicate that they may also provoke verbal aggression, as was suggested during some interviews within this study. This should be a concern, as strong evidence that being repeatedly subject to verbal aggression and abuse can lead to burnout and withdrawal of care by staff [ 30 ]. These mixed findings reflect results that were reported in two earlier studies of BWCs on mental health wards [ 12 , 13 ]. However, the very low use of the cameras, on just 10 per cent of the shifts where data was obtained, makes it even more difficult to draw any conclusions.

While the data shows limited impact of using BWCs on levels of incidents, we did find that during the pilot period BWC use tended to occur alongside physical restraint, but the direction of relationship is unclear as staff were asked to use BWCs when planning an intervention such as restraint. This relationship with restraint reflected the findings on several wards in a previous study [ 13 ], while contrasting with those reported in a second study that found reductions in incidents involving restraint during the evaluation period [ 12 ]. Such a mix of findings highlights the complexity of using BWCs as a violence reduction method within a busy healthcare setting in which several interacting components and contextual factors, and behaviours by staff and patients can affect outcomes [ 31 ]. The qualitative data collected during this pilot period highlighted the potential systemic and contextual factors such as low staffing that may have a confounding impact on the incident data presented in this simple form.

The findings presented within this evaluation provide some insights into the process of implementing BWCs as a safety intervention in mental health services and highlight some of the challenges and barriers faced. The use of implementation science to evaluate the piloting of BWCs on wards helps to demonstrate how multiple elements including a variety of contextual and systemic factors can have a considerable impact and thus change how a technology may vary not only between hospitals, but even across wards in the same hospital. By understanding the elements that may and do occur during the process of implementing such interventions, we can better understand if and how BWCs might be used in the future.

Within this pilot, extensive preparatory work conducted at a directorate and senior management level did not translate during the process of implementation at a ward level, which appeared to impact on the use of BWCs by individuals on the wards. This highlights that there is a need to utilise implementation science approaches in planning the implementation of new technologies or interventions and to investigate elements related to behavioural change and context rather than just the desired and actual effects of the intervention itself.

While ward staff and patients identified the potential for BWCs to enhance safety on the wards, participants distrusted their deployment and expressed concerns about ethical issues and possible harmful consequences of their use on therapeutic relationships, care provided and patient wellbeing. These themes reflect previous findings from a national interview study of patient and staff perspectives and experiences of BWCs in inpatient mental health wards [ 14 ]. Given these issues, alternatives such as increasing de-escalation skills were identified by staff as possible routes that may be more beneficial in these settings. Furthermore, other approaches such as safety huddles have also been highlighted within the literature as potential means to improve patient safety by looking ahead at what can be attended to or averted [ 32 ].

Furthermore, it is important to consider that the presence of power imbalances and the pre-existing culture on the ward have considerable implications for safety approaches and must be considered, as exemplified by the preferences by both staff and patients in this evaluation for more perceived ‘impartial’ interventions such as CCTV. As identified within previous studies [ 14 ], BWCs can have different implications for psychological safety, particularly for vulnerable patients who already feel criminalised in an environment with asymmetrical power imbalances between staff and patients. This is particularly salient when considering aspects of identity such as race, ethnicity, and gender both in terms of the identities of the patient group but also in terms of the staff/patient relationship.

While preferences in this study note CCTV as more ‘impartial’, work by Desai [ 33 ] draws on the literature about the use of surveillance cameras in other settings (such as public streets) as well as on psychiatric wards and concludes that CCTV monitoring is fraught with difficulties and challenges, and that ‘watching’ patients and staff through the lens of a camera can distort the reality of what is happening within a ward environment. In her recently published book, Desai [ 34 ] develops this theme to explore the impacts of being watched on both patients and staff through her ethnographic research in psychiatric intensive care units. She highlights concerns over the criminalisation of patient behaviour, safeguarding concerns in relation to the way women’s bodies and behaviours are viewed and judged, and the undermining by CCTV of ethical mental health practice by staff who attempt to engage in thoughtful, constructive, therapeutic interactions with patients in face-to-face encounters. Appenzeller et al.’s [ 35 ] review found that whilst the presence of CCTV appeared to increase subjective feelings of safety amongst patients and visitors, there was no objective evidence that video surveillance increases security, and that staff may develop an over-reliance on the technology.

In addition, our findings add to the existing literature which notes that alternative interventions and approaches that address underlying contextual and systemic issues related to improving care on inpatient wards require attention to address the underlying factors related to incidents, e.g., flashpoints [ 36 ]. Evidence suggests that factors leading to incidents can be predicted; therefore, there is a need to enable staff to work in a proactive way to anticipate and prevent incidents rather than view incidents as purely reactive [ 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Such skills-based and relational approaches are likely to impact more on improving safety and reducing incidents by addressing the complex and multi-faceted issue of incidents on inpatient mental health wards [ 40 ].

These findings highlight that interventions such as BWCs are not used within a vacuum, and that hospitals are complex contexts in which there are a range of unique populations, processes, and microsystems that are multi-faceted [ 41 ]. As a result, interventions will encounter both universal, specific, and local barriers that will impact on its functioning in the real world. This is salient because research suggests that camera use inside mental health wards is based on a perception of the violent nature of the mental health patient, a perception that not only influences practice but also impacts how patients experience the ward [ 33 ]. As a result, there needs to be careful consideration of the use of any new and innovative intervention aimed at improving safety within mental health settings that have limited research supporting their efficacy.

Limitations

While the study provides important insights into the efficacy and acceptability of introducing BWCs onto inpatient mental health wards, there were several limitations. Firstly, the analysis of incident data is limited in its nature as it only presents surface level information about incidents without wider contextual information. Results using such data should be cautiously interpreted as they do not account for confounding factors, such as staffing, acuity, ward culture or ward atmosphere, that are likely to contribute to incidents of violence and aggression. For example, while there was a statistically significant decrease in restrictive practice on the PICU across the study period, we know that BWCs were not widely used on that ward, so this is likely due to a confounding variable that was not accounted for in the study design.

Secondly, the study faced limitations in relation to recruitment, particularly with patients. Researchers’ access to wards was challenging due to high staff turnover and high rates of acuity, meaning many patients were not deemed well enough to be able to consent to take part in the study. In addition, the low use of the cameras on wards meant that many patients, and some staff, had not seen the BWCs in use. Similarly, patients had been provided limited information about the pilot, so their ability to engage in the research and describe their own experiences with BWCs was restricted.

Thirdly, analysis captures the active use of the BWC, however it does not fully capture the impact of staff wearing the cameras even where they do not actively use them. While our qualitative analysis provides insight into the limitation of such passive use, it is likely that the presence of the cameras being worn by staff, even when turned off, may have an impact on both staff and patient behaviours. This may explain trends in the data that did not reach significance but warrant further investigation in relation to the presence of BWCs, nonetheless.

Finally, researchers had planned to collect quantitative surveys from staff and patients in relation to their experiences of the ward atmosphere and climate, views related to therapeutic relationships on the ward, levels of burnout among staff, views on care, and attitudes to containment measures. Due to issues related to staff time, patient acuity, and poor engagement from staff leading to challenges accessing the wards, the collection of such survey data was unfeasible, and this element of the study was discontinued. As a result, we have not reported this aspect in our paper. This limitation reflects the busy nature of inpatient mental health wards with pressures on staff and high levels of ill health among patients. As such, traditional methodologies for evaluation are unlikely to elicit data that is comprehensive and meaningful. Alternative approaches may need to be considered.

Future directions

With BWCs being increasingly used across inpatient mental health services [ 14 ], it is important that further research and evaluation is conducted. To date, there is limited data regarding the effectiveness of this technology in relation to violence reduction; however, there may be other beneficial uses in relation to safeguarding and training [ 13 ]. Future research should consider alternative methods that ensure contextual factors are accounted for and that patient voices can be maximised. For example, focus groups with patients currently admitted to a mental health ward or interviews with those who have recently been on a ward that has used the cameras, would bypass problems encountered with capacity to consent in the present study. Furthermore, ethnographic approaches may provide a deeper understanding of the implementation, deployment and impact that BWCs have on wards.

Overall, this research sheds light on the complexities of using BWCs as a tool for ‘maximising safety’ in mental health settings. The findings suggest that BWCs have a limited impact on levels of incidents on wards, something that is likely to be largely influenced by the process of implementation as well as a range of contextual factors, including the staff and patient populations on the wards. As a result, it is likely that while BWCs may see successes in one hospital site this is not guaranteed for another site as such factors will have a considerable impact on efficacy, acceptability, and feasibility. Furthermore, the findings point towards the need for more consideration to be placed on processes of implementation and the complex ethical discussions regarding BWC use from both a patient and a staff perspective.

In conclusion, while there have been advances in digital applications and immersive technologies showing promise of therapeutic benefits for patients and staff more widely, whether BWCs and other surveillance approaches are to be part of that picture remains to be seen and needs to be informed by high-quality, co-produced research that focuses on wider therapeutic aspects of mental healthcare.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Department of Health and Social Care. The NHS Long Term Plan. 2019. https://www.longtermplan.nhs.uk/about/ . [Accessed on 01/11/2021].

NHS England. Violence prevention and safety. 2023. https://www.england.nhs.uk/supporting-our-nhs-people/health-and-wellbeing-programmes/violence-prevention-and-safety/#:~:text=The%20impact%20on%20staff%20is,thinking%20about%20leaving%20the%20organisation . [Accessed on 06/07/23].

Royal College of Nursing. Violence and aggression in the NHS: estimating the size and the impact of the problem. London: Royal College of Nursing; 2018.

Google Scholar  

Iozzino L, Ferrari C, Large M, Nielssen O, de Girolamo G. Prevalence and risk factors of violence by psychiatric acute inpatients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(6):e0128536. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128536 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cranage K, Foster K. Mental health nurses’ experience of challenging workplace situations: a qualitative descriptive study. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2020;31(3):665–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12986 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Jenkin G, Quigg S, Paap H, Cooney E, Peterson D, Every-Palmer S. Places of safety? Fear and violence in acute mental health facilities: a large qualitative study of staff and service user perspectives. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(5):e0266935. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266935 .

Gaub JE, Choate DE, Todak N, Katz CM, White MD. Officer perceptions of body-worn cameras before and after deployment: a study of three departments. Police Q. 2016;19(3):275–302.

Cubitt TI, Lesic R, Myers GL, Corry R. Body-worn video: a systematic review of literature. Australian New Z J Criminol. 2017;50(3):379–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004865816638909 .

Lum C, Koper CS, Wilson DB, Stoltz M, Goodier M, Eggins E et al. Body-worn cameras’ effects on police officers and citizen behavior: A systemitic review. Campbell Syst Reviews. 2020;16(3), e1112.

Ariel B, Newton M, McEwan L, Ashbridge GA, Weinborn C, Brants HS. Reducing assaults against Staff using body-worn cameras (BWCs) in Railway stations. Criminal Justice Rev. 2019;44(1):76–93.

Wilson K, Eaton J, Foye U, Ellis M, Thomas E, Simpson A. What evidence supports the use of body worn Cameras in mental health inpatient wards? A systematic review and narrative synthesis of the effects of body worn Cameras in public sector services. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/inm.12954 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Ellis T, Shurmer DL, Badham-May S, Ellis-Nee C. The use of body worn video cameras on mental health wards: results and implications from a pilot study. Mental Health Family Med. 2019;15:859–68.

Hardy S, Bennett L, Rosen P, Carroll S, White P, Palmer-Hill S. The feasibility of using body-worn cameras in an inpatient mental health setting. Mental Health Family Med. 2017;13:393–400.

Wilson K, Foye U, Thomas E, Chadwick M, Dodhia S, Allen J, Lynn J, Brennan G, Simpson A. Exploring the use of body-worn cameras in acute mental health wards: a qualitative interview study with mental health patients and staff. Int J Nurs Stud. 2023;140:104456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2023.104456 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Baker J, Pryjmachuk S. Will safe staffing in Mental Health nursing become a reality? J Psychiatry Mental Health Nurs. 2016;23(2):75–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12282 .

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Piano VL, Creswell JW. Understanding Research: A Consumer Guide. 2nd edition. 2015. Boston: Pearson Education, INC.

Bowers L, Simpson A, Alexander J. Patient-staff conflict: results of a survey on acute psychiatric wards. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2013;38(7):402–8.

Bowers L. The City-128 study of observation and outcomes. BMC Psychiatry. 2007;7(Suppl 1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-7-S1-S122 . S122.

Bowers L, Flood C, Brennan G, Allan T. A replication study of the City nurse intervention: reducing conflict and containment on three acute psychiatric wards. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2008;15:737–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2008.01294.x .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bowers L, James K, Quirk A, Simpson A, Stewart D, Hodsoll J, SUGAR. Reducing conflict and containment rates on acute psychiatric wards: the safewards cluster randomised controlled trial. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(9):1412–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2015.05.001 . Erratum in: Int J Nurs Stud. 2016;58:102. PMID: 26166187; PMCID: PMC4518134.

Bowers L, Douzenis A, Galeazzi G et al. Disruptive and dangerous behaviour by patients on acute psychiatric wards in three European centres. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology. 2005;40, 822–828. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00127-005-0967-1 .

Bowers L, Flood C, Brennan G, LiPang M, Oladapo P. Preliminary outcomes of a trial to reduce conflict and containment on acute psychiatric wards: City nurses. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2006;13:165–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2850.2006.00931.x .

Datix. (2019). Products. Retrieved from https://www.rldatix.com/en-uk/products .

Fazel S, Toynbee M, Ryland H, et al. Modifiable risk factors for inpatient violence in psychiatric hospital: prospective study and prediction model. Psychol Med. 2023;53(2):590–6. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721002063 .

Mushcab H, Bunting D, Yami S, Abandi A, Hunt C. An evaluation of Datix implementation for incident reporting at Johns Hopkins Aramco Healthcare. J Patient Saf Risk Manage. 2020;25(2):67–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/2516043520905481 .

SPSS. IBM SPSS statistics for Windows. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp; 2023.

Microsoft Corporation. (2018). Microsoft Excel . Retrieved from https://office.microsoft.com/excel .

Ritchie J, Lewis J. Qualitative. Research Practice. London: Sage; 2003.

Damschroder LJ, Aron DC, Keith RE, et al. Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science. Implement Sci. 2009;4:50. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-50 .

Porath CL, Pearson CM. Emotional and behavioral responses to workplace incivility and the impact of hierarchical status. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2009;42(Suppl 1):E326–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.01020.x .

Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, et al. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008;337. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a1655 .

Taylor-Watt J, Cruickshank A, Innes J, Brome B, Shah A. Reducing physical violence and developing a safety culture across wards in East London. Br J Mental Health Nurs. 2017. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjmh.2017.6.1.35 .

Desai S. The new stars of CCTV: what is the purpose of monitoring patients in communal areas of psychiatric hospital wards, bedrooms and seclusion rooms? Divers Equality Health Care. 2009;6(1):12. [Google Scholar].

Desai S. Surveillance Practices and Mental Health: the impact of CCTV inside mental health wards. Routledge; 2022.

Appenzeller YE, Appelbaum PS, Trachsel M. Ethical and practical issues in Video Surveillance of Psychiatric Units. Psychiatric Serv. 2020;71(5):480–6. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201900397 .

Bowers L. Safewards: a new model of conflict and containment on psychiatric wards. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2014;21(6):499–508. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpm.12129 . PMID: 24548312; PMCID: PMC4237187.

Goodman H, Papastavrou Brooks C, Price O, Barley EA. Barriers and facilitators to the effective de-escalation of conflict behaviours in forensic high-secure settings: a qualitative study. Int J Mental Health Syst. 2020;14:59. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-020-00392-5 .

Johnson ME, Delaney KR. Keeping the unit safe: the anatomy of escalation. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2007;13:42–52.

Johnson ME, Hauser PM. The practice of expert nurses: accompanying the patient to a calmer space. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2001;22:651–68.

Hamrin V, Iennaco J, Olsen D. A review of ecological factors affecting inpatient psychiatric unit violence: implications for relational and unit cultural improvements. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2009;30(4):214 – 26. doi: 10.1080/01612840802701083. PMID: 19363726.

Squires JE, Estabrooks CA, Scott SD, Cummings GG, Hayduk L. The influence of organizational context on the use of research by nurses in Canadian pediatric hospitals. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-351 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank The Burdett Trust for Nursing for funding this work. We would also like to acknowledge our wider Lived Experience Advisory Panel and Project Advisory Panel for their contributions and support and would like to thank the staff and service users on the wards we attended for their warmth and participation.

Funding was provided by The Burdett Trust of Nursing. Funders were independent of the research and did not impact findings.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Mental Health Nursing, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, Denmark Hill, London, SE5 8AF, UK

Una Foye, Keiran Wilson, Jessica Jepps, James Blease, Geoff Brennan & Alan Simpson

Florence Nightingale Faculty of Nursing, Midwifery & Palliative Care, Mental Health Nursing, King’s College London, London, UK

Una Foye, Keiran Wilson, Jessica Jepps, Geoff Brennan & Alan Simpson

Lived Experience Advisor, London, UK

Ellen Thomas, Leroy McAnuff, Sharon McKenzie, Katherine Barrett & Lilli Underwood

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors have read and approved the manuscript. Authors AS, UF, KW, GB created the protocol for the study. KW, JJ, UF conducted the recruitment for the study, and conducted the interviews. UF, JJ, JB, LMA, LU, SMK, KB, ET coded data, and contributed to the analysis. All authors supported drafting and development of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Una Foye .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical. Ethical approval was granted by the Health Research Authority: London - Camden & Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee (IRAS PROJECT ID 322268, REC Reference 23/LO/0337). All participants provided informed consent prior to enrolment in the study, including consent for publication of anonymised quotes.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary material 2, supplementary material 3, supplementary material 4, supplementary material 5, supplementary material 6, rights and permissions.

Open Access This 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/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Foye, U., Wilson, K., Jepps, J. et al. Exploring the use of body worn cameras in acute mental health wards: a mixed-method evaluation of a pilot intervention. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 681 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11085-x

Download citation

Received : 03 January 2024

Accepted : 07 May 2024

Published : 29 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11085-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Implementation
• Body worn cameras
• Qualitative
• Mental health

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• New Technique Could Help Build Quantum Computers of the Future

Key Takeaways

• Berkeley Lab researchers have reported a major advancement that could bring us closer to a scalable quantum computer.
• Using a femtosecond laser during experiments which explore the role of hydrogen in qubit formation, the researchers developed a method that programs the formation of telecom-band optical qubits in silicon for large-scale manufacturing.
• The technique could enable scalable quantum computers of the future by building on current silicon-based computing infrastructure.

Quantum computers have the potential to solve complex problems in human health, drug discovery, and artificial intelligence millions of times faster than some of the world’s fastest supercomputers. A network of quantum computers could advance these discoveries even faster. But before that can happen, the computer industry will need a reliable way to string together billions of qubits – or quantum bits – with atomic precision.

Connecting qubits, however, has been challenging for the research community. Some methods form qubits by placing an entire silicon wafer in a rapid annealing oven at very high temperatures. With these methods, qubits randomly form from defects (also known as color centers or quantum emitters) in silicon’s crystal lattice. And without knowing exactly where qubits are located in a material, a quantum computer of connected qubits will be difficult to realize.

But now, getting qubits to connect may soon be possible. A research team led by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) says that they are the first to use a femtosecond laser to create and “annihilate” qubits on demand, and with precision, by doping silicon with hydrogen.

The advance could enable quantum computers that use programmable optical qubits or “spin-photon qubits” to connect quantum nodes across a remote network. It could also advance a quantum internet that is not only more secure but could also transmit more data than current optical-fiber information technologies.

“This could carve out a potential new pathway for industry to overcome challenges in qubit fabrication and quality control.” – Thomas Schenkel, senior scientist, Accelerator Technology & Applied Physics Division

“To make a scalable quantum architecture or network, we need qubits that can reliably form on-demand, at desired locations, so that we know where the qubit is located in a material. And that’s why our approach is critical,” said Kaushalya Jhuria, a postdoctoral scholar in Berkeley Lab’s Accelerator Technology & Applied Physics (ATAP) Division. She is the first author on a new study that describes the technique in the journal Nature Communications . “Because once we know where a specific qubit is sitting, we can determine how to connect this qubit with other components in the system and make a quantum network.”

“This could carve out a potential new pathway for industry to overcome challenges in qubit fabrication and quality control,” said principal investigator Thomas Schenkel , head of the Fusion Science & Ion Beam Technology Program in Berkeley Lab’s ATAP Division. His group will host the first cohort of students from the University of Hawaii in June as part of a DOE Fusion Energy Sciences-funded RENEW project on workforce development where students will be immersed in color center/qubit science and technology.

Forming qubits in silicon with programmable control

The new method uses a gas environment to form programmable defects called “color centers” in silicon. These color centers are candidates for special telecommunications qubits or “spin photon qubits.” The method also uses an ultrafast femtosecond laser to anneal silicon with pinpoint precision where those qubits should precisely form. A femtosecond laser delivers very short pulses of energy within a quadrillionth of a second to a focused target the size of a speck of dust.

Spin photon qubits emit photons that can carry information encoded in electron spin across long distances – ideal properties to support a secure quantum network. Qubits are the smallest components of a quantum information system that encodes data in three different states: 1, 0, or a superposition that is everything between 1 and 0.

With help from Boubacar Kanté, a faculty scientist in Berkeley Lab’s Materials Sciences Division and professor of electrical engineering and computer sciences (EECS) at UC Berkeley, the team used a near-infrared detector to characterize the resulting color centers by probing their optical (photoluminescence) signals.

What they uncovered surprised them: a quantum emitter called the Ci center. Owing to its simple structure, stability at room temperature, and promising spin properties, the Ci center is an interesting spin photon qubit candidate that emits photons in the telecom band. “We knew from the literature that Ci can be formed in silicon, but we didn’t expect to actually make this new spin photon qubit candidate with our approach,” Jhuria said.

An artistic depiction of a new method to create high-quality color-centers (qubits) in silicon at specific locations using ultrafast laser pulses (femtosecond, or one quadrillionth of a second). The inset at the top-right shows an experimentally observed optical signal (photoluminescence) from the qubits, with their structures displayed at the bottom. (Credit: Kaushalya Jhuria/Berkeley Lab)

The researchers learned that processing silicon with a low femtosecond laser intensity in the presence of hydrogen helped to create the Ci color centers. Further experiments showed that increasing the laser intensity can increase the mobility of hydrogen, which passivates undesirable color centers without damaging the silicon lattice, Schenkel explained.

A theoretical analysis performed by Liang Tan, staff scientist in Berkeley Lab’s Molecular Foundry, shows that the brightness of the Ci color center is boosted by several orders of magnitude in the presence of hydrogen, confirming their observations from laboratory experiments.

“The femtosecond laser pulses can kick out hydrogen atoms or bring them back, allowing the programmable formation of desired optical qubits in precise locations,” Jhuria said.

The team plans to use the technique to integrate optical qubits in quantum devices such as reflective cavities and waveguides, and to discover new spin photon qubit candidates with properties optimized for selected applications.

“Now that we can reliably make color centers, we want to get different qubits to talk to each other – which is an embodiment of quantum entanglement – and see which ones perform the best. This is just the beginning,” said Jhuria.

“The ability to form qubits at programmable locations in a material like silicon that is available at scale is an exciting step towards practical quantum networking and computing,” said Cameron Geddes, Director of the ATAP Division.

Theoretical analysis for the study was performed at the Department of Energy’s National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC) at Berkeley Lab with support from the NERSC QIS@Perlmutter program.

The Molecular Foundry and NERSC are DOE Office of Science user facilities at Berkeley Lab.

This work was supported by the DOE Office of Fusion Energy Sciences.

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) is committed to delivering solutions for humankind through research in clean energy, a healthy planet, and discovery science. Founded in 1931 on the belief that the biggest problems are best addressed by teams, Berkeley Lab and its scientists have been recognized with 16 Nobel Prizes. Researchers from around the world rely on the Lab’s world-class scientific facilities for their own pioneering research. Berkeley Lab is a multiprogram national laboratory managed by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science.

DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit energy.gov/science .

• Emerging Capabilities

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Research progress of superhydrophobic coatings in the protection of earthen sites, 1. introduction, 2. material properties and surface damage mechanisms of earthen sites, 2.1. characteristics of earthen site materials and construction, 2.2. the impact of climate and environment on the damage of earthen sites, 3. technical requirements and main systems of protective coatings for earthen sites, 4. the main protective effect of superhydrophobic coatings on earthen sites, 4.1. water-repellent properties of superhydrophobic coatings, 4.2. breathability of superhydrophobic coatings, 4.3. durability of superhydrophobic coatings, 4.4. transparency of superhydrophobic coatings, 5. summary and outlook, author contributions, conflicts of interest.

• Matera, F.; Moss, E. Temporary site protection for earthen walls and murals at Çata1höyük, Turkey. Conserv. Manag. Archaeol. Sites 2004 , 6 , 213–227. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lei, Y. Study on the weathering of the emperor Qin’S Terracotta. Sci. Conserv. Archaeol. 2004 , 16 , 36–42. [ Google Scholar ]
• Correia, M.R.A.R. Conservation in Earthen Heritage: Assessment and Significance of Failure, Criteria, Conservation Theory, and Strategies ; Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo, Q.; Wang, Y.; Chen, W.; Pei, Q.; Sun, M.; Yang, S.; Zhang, J.; Du, Y. Key Issues and Research Progress on the Deterioration Processes and Protection Technology of Earthen Sites under Multi-Field Coupling. Coatings 2022 , 12 , 1677. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Z.; Wang, X.; Sun, M.; Chen, W.; Guo, Q.; Zhang, H. Conservation of Jiaohe ancient earthen site in China. J. Rock. Mech. Geotech. Eng. 2011 , 3 , 270–281. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Du, Y.; Dong, W.; Cui, K.; Chen, W.; Yang, W. Research progress on the development mechanism and exploratory protection of the scaling off on earthen sites in NW China. Sci. China Technol. Sci. 2023 , 66 , 2183–2196. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guo, Q.; Huang, J.; Pei, Q.; Zhang, B.; Zhan, H.; Zhang, H.; Richards, J.; Viles, H. Erosion Model for Wind-Blown Sand Flow at Earthen Sites in Arid Environment, Northwest China. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 2023 , 1–16. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, C.; Chen, K.; Chen, D.; Xi, S.; Geng, J.; Zhu, D. Research progress on in-situ protection status and technology of earthen sites in moisty environment. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020 , 253 , 119219. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, W.; Chang, B.; Zhang, Y.; Gu, Z.; Yu, C.W.; Luo, X. Study on Barriers of Water Salt Transfers in Earthen Sites by Plastic-Coated Sand. Atmosphere 2023 , 14 , 236. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, Y.; Li, M.; Wang, X.; Guo, Q. Status and Countermeasures of Conservation of Earthen Monuments in Moist Circumstances. Dunhuang Res. 2011 , 6 , 70–75. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jambhekar, V.A.; Helmig, R.; Schröder, N.; Shokri, N. Free-Flow–Porous-Media Coupling for Evaporation-Driven Transport and Precipitation of Salt in Soil. Transport Porous Med. 2015 , 110 , 251–280. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, Y.; Wang, S.; Zhang, B.; Wu, J. Investigation and research on relics diseases of the earthen site of Kuahuqiao Site Museum. Sci. Conserv. Archaeol. 2018 , 30 , 53–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schulz, W.; Smith, J.B.; Wang, G.; Jiang, Y.; Roering, J.J. Clayey landslide initiation and acceleration strongly modulated by soil swelling. Geophys. Res. Lett. 2018 , 45 , 1888–1896. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dong, M.; Hu, H.; Guo, Q.; Gong, X.; Azzam, R.; Kong, M. Correlation of Environmental Parameters and the Water Saturation Induced Deterioration of Earthen Archaeological Sites: The Case of World Heritage Liangzhu City, China. Heritage 2021 , 4 , 387–400. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, T.; Guo, Q.; Pei, Q.; Chen, W.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, B.; Yu, J. Destruction or protection? Experimental studies on the mechanism of biological soil crusts on the surfaces of earthen sites. Catena 2023 , 227 , 107096. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, X.; Zhang, B.; Pei, Q.; Guo, Q.; Chen, W.; Li, F. Experimental studies on sacrificial layer in conservation of earthen sites. J. Cult. Herit. 2020 , 41 , 74–83. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Han, X.; Rong, B.; Huang, X.; Luo, H. Bridged siloxanes as novel potential hybrid consolidants for ancient Qin terracotta. Prog. Org. Coat. 2016 , 101 , 416–422. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, S.; Wang, R.; Yu, J.; Peng, X.; Cai, Y.; Tu, B. Effectiveness of the anti-erosion of an MICP coating on the surfaces of ancient clay roof tiles. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020 , 243 , 118202. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dong, J.; Liu, X. Application of improved enzyme induced calcium carbonate precipitation (EICP) technology in surface protection of earthen sites. J. Cult. Herit. 2022 , 54 , 146–154. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pei, Q.Q.; Wang, X.D.; Zhao, L.Y.; Zhang, B.; Guo, Q.L. A sticky rice paste preparation method for reinforcing earthen heritage sites. J. Cult. Herit. 2020 , 44 , 98–109. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hejazi, S.M.; Sheikhzadeh, M.; Abtahi, S.M.; Zadhoush, A. A simple review of soil reinforcement by using natural and synthetic fibers. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012 , 30 , 100–116. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, L.; Shao, M.; Wang, S.; Li, Z. Preservation of earthen heritage sites on the Silk Road, northwest China from the impact of the environment. Environ. Earth Sci. 2011 , 64 , 1625–1639. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bishop, M.D.; Kim, S.; Palomino, A.M.; Lee, J. Deformation of “tunable” clay–polymer composites. Appl. Clay Sci. 2014 , 101 , 265–271. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lei, H.; Xu, Y.; Li, X.; Liu, G.; Jin, Y. Experimental study on consolidation characteristics of polyacrylamide-modified lime-stabilized dredger fill. Chin. J. Geotech. Eng. 2017 , 39 , 107–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vinod, J.S.; Indraratna, B.; Al Mahamud, M.A. Stabilisation of an erodible soil using a chemical admixture. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng. Ground Improv. 2010 , 163 , 43–51. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• He, F.; Lu, R.; Su, H.; Zhou, J.; Zhang, J.; Wang, N. Durability test and reinforced mechanism on adding SH materials into soil of archaeological sites. Rock Soil Mech. 2019 , 40 , 297–307. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen, W.W.; Zhang, Q.Y.; Liu, H.W.; Guo, Z.Q. Feasibility of protecting earthen sites by infiltration of modified polyvinyl alcohol. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019 , 204 , 410–418. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ashok Kumar, S.S.; Bashir, S.; Ramesh, K.; Ramesh, S. A comprehensive review: Super hydrophobic graphene nanocomposite coatings for underwater and wet applications to enhance corrosion resistance. FlatChem 2022 , 31 , 100326. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Das, S.; Kumar, S.; Samal, S.K.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, S.K. A review on superhydrophobic polymer nanocoatings: Recent development and applications. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2018 , 57 , 2727–2745. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gu, J.; Xiao, P.; Chen, J.; Liu, F.; Huang, Y.; Li, G.; Zhang, J.; Chen, T. Robust preparation of superhydrophobic polymer/carbon nanotube hybrid membranes for highly effective removal of oils and separation of water-in-oil emulsions. J. Mater. Chem. A 2014 , 2 , 15268–15272. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, Z.; Wang, L.; Sun, W.; Li, S.; Zhu, T.; Liu, W.; Liu, G. Superhydrophobic epoxy coating modified by fluorographene used for anti-corrosion and self-cleaning. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2017 , 401 , 146–155. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Junaidi, M.; Azaman, S.H.; Ahmad, N.; Leo, C.P.; Lim, G.W.; Chan, D.; Yee, H.M. Superhydrophobic coating of silica with photoluminescence properties synthesized from rice husk ash. Prog. Org. Coat. 2017 , 111 , 29–37. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Steele, A.; Bayer, I.; Loth, E. Inherently superoleophobic nanocomposite coatings by spray atomization. Nano Lett. 2008 , 9 , 501–505. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bayer, I.S.; Steele, A.; Martorana, P.J.; Loth, E. Fabrication of superhydrophobic polyurethane/organoclay nano-structured composites from cyclomethicone-in-water emulsions. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2010 , 257 , 823–826. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Waqar, A.; Othman, I.; Skrzypkowski, K.; Ghumman, A.S.M. Evaluation of Success of Superhydrophobic Coatings in the Oil and Gas Construction Industry Using Structural Equation Modeling. Coatings 2023 , 13 , 526. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, Q.; Chen, W.; Zhang, J. Wettability of earthen sites protected by PVA solution with a high degree of alcoholysis. Catena 2021 , 196 , 104929. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bayer, I.S. Superhydrophobic Coatings from Ecofriendly Materials and Processes: A Review. Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2020 , 7 , 2000095. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sbardella, F.; Pronti, L.; Santarelli, M.L.; Asua Gonzàlez, J.M.; Bracciale, M.P. Waterborne Acrylate-Based Hybrid Coatings with Enhanced Resistance Properties on Stone Surfaces. Coatings 2018 , 8 , 283. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Feng, K.; Hung, G.; Liu, J.; Li, M.; Zhou, C.; Liu, M. Fabrication of high performance superhydrophobic coatings by spray-coating of polysiloxane modified halloysite nanotubes. Chem. Eng. J. 2018 , 331 , 744–754. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, F.; Feng, L.; Li, G.; Zhai, Z.; Ma, H.; Deng, B.; Zhang, S. Fabrication and Properties of Superhydrophobic Waterborne Polyurethane Composites with Micro-Rough Surface Structure Using Electrostatic Spraying. Polymers 2019 , 11 , 1748. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, B.; Jia, R. Preparation of super-hydrophobic films based on waterborne polyurethane and their hydrophobicity characteristics. Prog. Org. Coat. 2019 , 135 , 440–448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, Y.; Hao, T.; Wu, W.; Meng, Y.; Cao, X.; Zhang, Q.; She, W.; You, J.; Shi, D.; Jiang, T. A novel moisture-controlled siloxane-modified hyperbranched waterborne polyurethane for durable superhydrophobic coatings. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2022 , 587 , 152446. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, J.; Wang, C.; Mu, C.; Lin, W. A waterborne polyurethane coating functionalized by isobornyl with enhanced antibacterial adhesion and hydrophobic property. Eur. Polym. J. 2018 , 108 , 498–506. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, Q.; Chen, W.; Fan, W. Protecting earthen sites by soil hydrophobicity under freeze–thaw and dry–wet cycles. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020 , 262 , 120089. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhou, X.; He, W.; Ou, J.; Hu, Y.; Wang, F.; Fang, X.; Li, W.; Amirfazli, A. Translucent superhydrophobic coating for murals protection. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2024 , 689 , 133750. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Z.; Liu, X.; Chen, H.; Li, J.; Wang, X.; Zhu, J. Application of epoxy resin in cultural relics protection. Chinese Chem. Lett. 2024 , 35 , 109194. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, Y.; An, Q.; Yang, B. Synthesis of UV-curable polyurethane acrylate modified with polyhedral oligomeric silsesquioxane and fluorine for iron cultural relic protection coating. Prog. Org. Coat. 2019 , 136 , 105235. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jia, M.; He, L.; Liang, J.; Pan, A.; Zhao, L.; Simon, S. Dispersant effect on coatings of POSS-based poly methylmethacrylate hybrids and their protective performance to sandstones. Prog. Org. Coat. 2019 , 132 , 388–398. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, M.; Men, X.; Xue, Q. Environmentally safe, substrate-independent and repairable nanoporous coatings: Large-scale preparation, high transparency and antifouling properties. J. Mater. Chem. A 2017 , 5 , 20277–20288. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Facio, D.S.; Ordoñez, J.A.; Gil, M.L.A.; Carrascosa, L.A.M.; Mosquera, M.J. New Consolidant-Hydrophobic Treatment by Combining SiO 2 Composite and Fluorinated Alkoxysilane: Application on Decayed Biocalcareous Stone from an 18th Century Cathedral. Coatings 2018 , 8 , 170. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, X.; Yang, F.; Lu, G.; Zhao, X.; Chen, Z.; Qian, S. A breathable and environmentally friendly superhydrophobic coating for anti-condensation applications. Chem. Eng. J. 2021 , 412 , 128725. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Y.; Li, B.; Zhao, X.; Tian, N.; Zhang, J. Totally Waterborne, Nonfluorinated, Mechanically Robust, and Self-Healing Superhydrophobic Coatings for Actual Anti-Icing. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018 , 10 , 39391–39399. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, D.; Wang, H.; Liu, Y.; Wei, D.; Zhao, Z. Large-scale fabrication of durable and robust super-hydrophobic spray coatings with excellent repairable and anti-corrosion performance. Chem. Eng. J. 2019 , 367 , 169–179. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xiang, T.; Liu, J.; Lv, Z.; Wei, F.; Liu, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Ren, H.; Zhou, S.; Chen, D. The effect of silicon-based waterproof agent on the wettability of superhydrophobic concrete and enhanced corrosion resistance. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021 , 313 , 125482. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, W.; Wang, S.; Yao, D.; Wang, X.; Yu, X.; Zhang, Y. Fabrication of all-dimensional superhydrophobic mortar with enhanced waterproof ability and freeze-thaw resistance. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020 , 238 , 117626. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, X.; Liu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, C.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, H.; Wang, J. Robust superhydrophobic epoxy composite coating prepared by dual interfacial enhancement. Chem. Eng. J. 2019 , 371 , 276–285. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, S.G.; Ham, D.S.; Lee, D.Y.; Bong, H.; Cho, K. Transparent superhydrophobic/translucent superamphiphobic coatings based on silica–fluoropolymer hybrid nanoparticles. Langmuir 2013 , 29 , 15051–15057. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cho, E.; Chang-Jian, C.; Chen, H.; Chuang, K.; Zheng, J.; Hsiao, Y.; Lee, K.; Huang, J. Robust multifunctional superhydrophobic coatings with enhanced water/oil separation, self-cleaning, anti-corrosion, and anti-biological adhesion. Chem. Eng. J. 2017 , 314 , 347–357. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aslanidou, D.; Karapanagiotis, I.; Lampakis, D. Waterborne Superhydrophobic and Superoleophobic Coatings for the Protection of Marble and Sandstone. Materials 2018 , 11 , 585. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ha, Z.; Lei, L.; Zhou, M.; Xia, Y.; Chen, X.; Mao, P.; Fan, B.; Shi, S. Bio-Based Waterborne Polyurethane Coatings with High Transparency, Antismudge and Anticorrosive Properties. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2023 , 15 , 7427–7441. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lan, Z.; Duan, W. Achieving surface hydrophobic and moisture-proof properties of ancient-book paper by in-situ protection of epoxy-based POSS/PVDF composite coating. Bull. Mater. Sci. 2023 , 46 , 73. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Share and Cite

Liu, Y.; Li, Q.; Zhou, R.; Yusufu, R. Research Progress of Superhydrophobic Coatings in the Protection of Earthen Sites. Coatings 2024 , 14 , 710. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings14060710

Liu Y, Li Q, Zhou R, Yusufu R. Research Progress of Superhydrophobic Coatings in the Protection of Earthen Sites. Coatings . 2024; 14(6):710. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings14060710

Liu, Yisi, Qian Li, Ruiting Zhou, and Renaguli Yusufu. 2024. "Research Progress of Superhydrophobic Coatings in the Protection of Earthen Sites" Coatings 14, no. 6: 710. https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings14060710

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals