IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0211636.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Quality of Research Practice – An interdisciplinary face validity evaluation of a quality model

Author

Listed:
  • Pär Mårtensson
  • Uno Fors
  • Emelie Fröberg
  • Udo Zander
  • Gunnar H Nilsson

Abstract

There are few acknowledged multidisciplinary quality standards for research practice and evaluation. This study evaluates the face validity of a recently developed comprehensive quality model that includes 32 defined concepts based on four main areas (credible, contributory, communicable, and conforming) describing indicators of research practice quality. Responses from 42 senior researchers working within 18 different departments at three major universities showed that the research quality model was–overall–valid. The vast majority believed all concepts in the model to be important, and did not indicate the need for further development. However, some of the sub-concepts were indicated as being slightly less important. Further, there were significant differences concerning ‘communicable’ between disciplines and academic levels, and for ‘conforming’ between genders. Our study indicates that the research quality model proposes the opportunity to move to a more systematic and multidisciplinary approach to research quality improvement, which has implications for how scientific knowledge is obtained.

Suggested Citation

  • Pär Mårtensson & Uno Fors & Emelie Fröberg & Udo Zander & Gunnar H Nilsson, 2019. "Quality of Research Practice – An interdisciplinary face validity evaluation of a quality model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-19, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211636
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211636
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211636
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211636&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0211636?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hessels, Laurens K. & van Lente, Harro, 2008. "Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 740-760, May.
    2. Richard J. Boland & Ramkrishnan V. Tenkasi, 1995. "Perspective Making and Perspective Taking in Communities of Knowing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(4), pages 350-372, August.
    3. Deborah Dougherty, 1992. "Interpretive Barriers to Successful Product Innovation in Large Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 179-202, May.
    4. Mårtensson, Pär & Fors, Uno & Wallin, Sven-Bertil & Zander, Udo & Nilsson, Gunnar H, 2016. "Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary approach to assessing research practice and quality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 593-603.
    5. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    6. Joep P. Cornelissen & Rodolphe Durand, 2014. "Moving Forward: Developing Theoretical Contributions in Management Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(6), pages 995-1022, September.
    7. Alfred Kieser & Lars Leiner, 2009. "Why the Rigour–Relevance Gap in Management Research Is Unbridgeable," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 516-533, May.
    8. Zur Shapira, 2011. "“I've Got a Theory Paper---Do You?”: Conceptual, Empirical, and Theoretical Contributions to Knowledge in the Organizational Sciences," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1312-1321, October.
    9. Laurens K. Hessels & Harro van Lente, 2008. "Re-thinking knowledge production: a literature review and a research agenda," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-03, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Feb 2008.
    10. Daniel Robey & M. Lynne Markus, 1998. "Beyond Rigor and Relevance: Producing Consumable Research about Information Systems," Information Resources Management Journal (IRMJ), IGI Global, vol. 11(1), pages 7-16, January.
    11. Beth A. Bechky, 2003. "Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 312-330, June.
    12. Jappelli, Tullio & Nappi, Carmela Anna & Torrini, Roberto, 2017. "Gender effects in research evaluation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 911-924.
    13. Tsao, J.Y. & Boyack, K.W. & Coltrin, M.E. & Turnley, J.G. & Gauster, W.B., 2008. "Galileo's stream: A framework for understanding knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 330-352, March.
    14. Joep P. Cornelissen & Rodolphe Durand, 2014. "Moving Forward: Developing Theoretical Contributions in Management Studies," Post-Print hal-01097568, HAL.
    15. John Seely Brown & Paul Duguid, 1991. "Organizational Learning and Communities-of-Practice: Toward a Unified View of Working, Learning, and Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 40-57, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Caroline A. Bartel & Raghu Garud, 2009. "The Role of Narratives in Sustaining Organizational Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(1), pages 107-117, February.
    2. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2020. "Innovating with Strangers; Managing Knowledge Barriers Across Distances in Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 17(01), pages 1-33, February.
    3. Hong, Jacky Fok Loi & Snell, Robin Stanley & Easterby-Smith, Mark, 2009. "Knowledge flow and boundary crossing at the periphery of a MNC," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 539-554, December.
    4. Caccamo, Marta & Pittino, Daniel & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Boundary objects, knowledge integration, and innovation management: A systematic review of the literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    5. Mårtensson, Pär & Fors, Uno & Wallin, Sven-Bertil & Zander, Udo & Nilsson, Gunnar H, 2016. "Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary approach to assessing research practice and quality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 593-603.
    6. Claudio Biscaro & Anna Comacchio, 2018. "Knowledge Creation Across Worldviews: How Metaphors Impact and Orient Group Creativity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 289(1), pages 58-79, February.
    7. Haselsteiner, Julia, 2022. "Unraveling the Process of Knowledge Integration in Agile Product Development Teams," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 7(2), pages 354-389.
    8. Maggie Chuoyan Dong & Yulin Fang & Detmar W. Straub, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Distance on the Joint Performance of Collaborating Firms: The Role of Adaptive Interorganizational Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 309-331, June.
    9. Becker, Markus C. & Rullani, Francesco & Zirpoli, Francesco, 2021. "The role of digital artefacts in early stages of distributed innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    10. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2018. "Knowledge Transition: A Conceptual Model of Knowledge Transfer for Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(05), pages 1-23, October.
    11. Christopher Wickert & Corinne Post & Jonathan P. Doh & John E. Prescott & Andrea Prencipe, 2021. "Management Research that Makes a Difference: Broadening the Meaning of Impact," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 297-320, March.
    12. Torsten Ringberg & Markus Reihlen, 2008. "Towards a Socio‐Cognitive Approach to Knowledge Transfer," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 912-935, July.
    13. Johann Piet Hausberg & Peter S. H. Leeflang, 2019. "Absorbing Integration: Empirical Evidence On The Mediating Role Of Absorptive Capacity Between Functional-/Cross-Functional Integration And Innovation Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(06), pages 1-37, August.
    14. Kent D. Miller & Shu-Jou Lin, 2010. "Different Truths in Different Worlds," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 97-114, February.
    15. Ann Majchrzak & Philip H. B. More & Samer Faraj, 2012. "Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 951-970, August.
    16. Ryan Krause & Michael C. Withers, 2022. "Propulsions Toward What Capes? Testing Normative Theory Through a Panorama of Consequences," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(2), pages 317-333, November.
    17. Peter Tsasis & Jenna M. Evans & Linda Rush & John Diamond, 2013. "Learning to Learn: towards a Relational and Transformational Model of Learning for Improved Integrated Care Delivery," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-23, June.
    18. Mark Thompson, 2005. "Structural and Epistemic Parameters in Communities of Practice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 151-164, April.
    19. Gabriel Szulanski & Dimo Ringov & Robert J. Jensen, 2016. "Overcoming Stickiness: How the Timing of Knowledge Transfer Methods Affects Transfer Difficulty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 304-322, April.
    20. Linus Dahlander & Lars Frederiksen, 2012. "The Core and Cosmopolitans: A Relational View of Innovation in User Communities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 988-1007, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211636. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.