When academic impact is not enough: a concept mapping study characterising excellence in practice-based research

Authors:
Open Access
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Background: Research quality is often discussed in terms of excellence, emphasising replicability and trustworthiness. Practice-based research instead emphasises implementability and practical impact, and thus, may reflect other values and logics and challenge how high-quality practice-based research is defined. The aim of this study is to explore what characterises excellent practice-based research. Method: R&D staff at social and health care organisations in Sweden were invited to participate in a concept mapping study. Forty-eight participants were prompted to finish the sentence: ‘Excellent practice-based research is characterised by …’ in a brainstorming session. Next, participants (n=22) worked individually to sort statements by similarity and rate perceived importance (n=13) and experience (n=10). Data was analysed with multidimensional scaling, cluster analysis and t-tests. Lastly, a digital workshop with 50 participants was conducted to facilitate the interpretation of cluster solutions. Results: Eighty-three statements were distilled into 11 clusters from characteristics typical for traditional academic values (for example, ‘deploying appropriate methods’) and practice-based research (for example, ‘being actionable’) to characteristics emphasising the unique blend between them, such as ‘capturing and conveying reality’ and ‘embracing different agendas and perspectives’, the latter rated as the most important quality of excellent practice-based research, followed by ‘deploying appropriate methods’ and ‘being actionable’. Conclusions: Practice-based research is a complex field, addressing both ‘why things are’ and ‘how they work’. This study offers insights into how excellent practice-based research can be defined, broadening the view of what excellence entails.
Funding Information
  • Forskningsrådet för Arbetsliv och Socialvetenskap (2018-01315)

This publication has 46 references indexed in Scilit: