Search results

This study focused on identifying measurable constructs of a restorative classroom and appropriate metrics to measure those constructs through content validity analysis of a direct observation tool. The tool was designed to assess restorative practices implementation in the classroom in the context of professional development supporting teachers in a fundamental reorientation towards non-punitive discipline.

The authors administered a 30-item survey to a panel of 14 experts in restorative practices implementation in schools asking them to provide quantitative and qualitative feedback on the tool's content, metrics, and utility for building teachers' skill and confidence in promoting a restorative classroom. The authors calculated item-level content validity indices and scale-level content validity indices. To interpret findings, the authors applied acceptability criteria recommended in the literature. The authors used qualitative coding to analyze qualitative responses and contextualize quantitative findings.

Quantitative results indicated that the tool's structure and measures of teacher behavior were acceptable. The student behavior scale did not meet the acceptability criterion. Qualitative feedback indicated that observation and later co-reflection on teachers' use of specific restorative skills was deemed helpful to teacher implementation of restorative practices. Observations of student behaviors, however, needed to be broadened to emphasize student voice and agency and the quality of student interactions.

Novel approaches to measurement are needed to facilitate teacher implementation of restorative practices as schools adopt those practices to promote equitable student agency, engagement and belonging in a pivotal shift from existing punitive discipline systems.

The purpose of the present study was the development of a methodology for translating predicted rates of decompression sickness (DCS), following tower escape from a sunken submarine, into predicted probability of survival, a more useful statistic for making operational decisions.

Predictions were made, using existing models, for the probabilities of a range of DCS symptoms following submarine tower escape. Subject matter expert estimates of the effect of these symptoms on a submariner’s ability to survive in benign weather conditions on the sea surface until rescued were combined with the likelihoods of the different symptoms occurring using standard probability theory. Plots were generated showing the dependence of predicted probability of survival following escape on the escape depth and the pressure within the stricken submarine.

Current advice on whether to attempt tower escape is based on avoiding rates of DCS above approximately 5%–10%. Consideration of predicted survival rates, based on subject matter expert opinion, suggests that the current advice might be considered as conservative in the distressed submarine scenario, as DCS rates of 10% are not anticipated to markedly affect survival rates.

According to the authors’ knowledge, this study represents the first attempt to quantify the effect of different DCS symptoms on the probability of survival in submarine tower escape.

The purpose of this paper is to determine best practices of aid agencies for outsourcing logistics to commercial logistics service providers (LSPs) in disaster relief. Moreover, it evaluates the application of the Delphi method for research in humanitarian logistics.

The paper is based on a two-round Delphi study with 31 experts from aid agencies and a complementary full-day focus group with 12 experts from aid agencies and LSPs.

The study revealed 12 best practices for outsourcing logistics in disaster relief and a compilation of more than 100 activities for putting these practices into action. Experts consider a proper balance between efficiency and compliance, a detailed contract and a detailed service request most important. Additionally, the Delphi method was found to be a promising technique for research on humanitarian logistics.

By critically examining the Delphi method, this study establishes the basis for a wider application of the technique in the field of humanitarian logistics. Furthermore, it can help to prioritize future research as the ranking of practices reflects the priorities of practitioners.

The paper provides guidance to practitioners at aid agencies in charge of outsourcing logistics.

This research is one of the first in the field of humanitarian logistics to apply the Delphi method. Moreover, it addresses the lack of literature dealing with approaches for building successful cross-sectoral partnerships.

To construct a scientific and reasonable indicator system, it is necessary to design a set of standardized indicator primary selection and optimization inspection process. The purpose of this paper is to provide theoretical guidance and reference standards for the indicator system design process, laying a solid foundation for the application of the indicator system, by systematically exploring the expert evaluation method to optimize the index system to enhance its credibility and reliability, to improve its resolution and accuracy and reduce its objectivity and randomness.

The paper is based on system theory and statistics, and it designs the main line of “relevant theoretical analysis – identification of indicators – expert assignment and quality inspection” to achieve the design and optimization of the indicator system. First, the theoretical basis analysis, relevant factor analysis and physical process description are used to clarify the comprehensive evaluation problem and the correlation mechanism. Second, the system structure analysis, hierarchical decomposition and indicator set identification are used to complete the initial establishment of the indicator system. Third, based on expert assignment method, such as Delphi assignments, statistical analysis, t-test and non-parametric test are used to complete the expert assignment quality diagnosis of a single index, the reliability and validity test is used to perform single-index assignment correction and consistency test is used for KENDALL coordination coefficient and F-test multi-indicator expert assignment quality diagnosis.

Compared with the traditional index system construction method, the optimization process used in the study standardizes the process of index establishment, reduces subjectivity and randomness, and enhances objectivity and scientificity.

The innovation point and value of the paper are embodied in three aspects. First, the system design process of the combined indicator system, the multi-dimensional index screening and system optimization are carried out to ensure that the index system is scientific, reasonable and comprehensive. Second, the experts’ background is comprehensively evaluated. The objectivity and reliability of experts’ assignment are analyzed and improved on the basis of traditional methods. Third, aim at the quality of expert assignment, conduct t-test, non-parametric test of single index, and multi-optimal test of coordination and importance of multiple indicators, enhance experts the practicality of assignment and ensures the quality of expert assignment.

This paper aims to introduce a crowd-based method for theorizing. The purpose is not to achieve a scientific theory. On the contrary, the purpose is to achieve a model that may challenge current scientific theories or lead research in new phenomena.

This paper describes a case study of theorizing by using a crowd-based method. The first section of the paper introduces what do the authors know about crowdsourcing, crowd science and the aggregation of non-expert views. The second section details the case study. The third section analyses the aggregation. Finally, the fourth section elaborates the conclusions, limitations and future research.

This document answers to what extent the crowd-based method produces similar results to theories tested and published by experts.

From a theoretical perspective, this study provides evidence to support the research agenda associated with crowd science. The main limitation of this study is that the crowded research models and the expert research models are compared in terms of the graph. Nevertheless, some academics may argue that theory building is about an academic heritage.

This paper exemplifies how to obtain an expert-level research model by aggregating the views of non-experts.

This study is particularly important for institutions with limited access to costly databases, labs and researchers.

Previous research suggested that a collective of individuals may help to conduct all the stages of a research endeavour. Nevertheless, a formal method for theorizing based on the aggregation of non-expert views does not exist. This paper provides the method and evidence of its practical implications.

This paper aims to analyse the ways the textual materials of job advertisements do the gendering for prospective expert positions and create a space for ambiquity/non-ambiquity in the gender labelling of this expertise. Expert positions are almost always openly announced and are important to organizations because they often lead to higher managerial positions. By gendering the prospective positions, the job advertisements bring forth repertoires strengthening the gendering of work and gendered expert employee positions.

This study draws on qualitative textual and visual data of open job advertisements for expert positions. The materials of the study are gathered from open job advertisements in two countries, i.e. Finland and Estonia with rather similar labour market structures in relation to gender positions but differing as regards their gender equality.

The analyses show that the gendering of expert work takes place in the job advertisements by rendering subtly gendered articulations, yet allowing for interpretative repertoires appear. The analysis reveals some differences in the formulations of the advertisements for expert jobs in the two countries. It also shows that in general the requirements for an ideal expert candidate are coated with superlatives that are gendered in rather stereotypical ways, and that the ideal candidates for highly expert jobs are extremely flexible and follows the ideal of an adaptable and plastic employee, willing to work their utmost. This paper contributes to the “doing gender” literature by adding an analysis of the textual gendering of ideal candidates for positions of expertise.

The research materials do not expose all the issues pertinent to questions of the ideal gendered candidate. For instance, questions of ethnicity in relation to the definition of the ideal candidate cannot be studied with the data used for this study. Being an exploratory study, the results do not aim for generalizable results concerning job advertisements for expert positions.

This paper contributes to the “doing gender” and “gendering” literature by addressing the question of how and in what ways gender is defined and done for an expert positions prior the candidates are chosen to those jobs. It also offers new insights into the global construction of gendered expert jobs advertisements by addressing the topic with data from two countries. It further contributes to understanding the gendered shaping of expertise in the management literature.

Non-technical skills are of increasing importance for safety engineers to perform their job. In their position as expert consultants, they work closely with managers. Thus, gaining management support is oftentimes crucial for safety engineers to successfully improve occupational health and safety. Drawing on organizational support theory (OST), this study investigates how safety engineers’ non-technical skills in communication and persuasion (i.e. rational and hard influence tactics) are related with their management support, and how management support is related with their individual task proficiency (ITP). The purpose of this paper is to examine the moderating role of safety engineers’ expert power in this context.

Using an online questionnaire, survey data were collected from 251 safety engineers working in Austria.

Rational influence tactics are positively related to ITP via management support, whereas hard influence tactics are not. Safety engineers’ expert power moderates the relationship between influence tactics and management support and, consequently ITP. High (vs low) expert status strengthens the positive relationship of rational influence tactics on ITP via management support. For hard influence tactics, high (vs low) expert power buffered the negative relationship of upward appeal and pressure on ITP via management support.

Safety engineers should rely on rational persuasion when cooperating with management to obtain support and improve their own performance.

This study connects the effect of influence tactics in the context of safety engineers’ work performance with OST. It demonstrates that safety engineers’ influence tactics are related to work role performance through management support and that these relationships are moderated by expert power.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate and theoretically explain how line managers and lower-status experts work together in public health-care organizations. Hence, this study explores how lower-status experts influence line managers' decision-making and task prioritizing in order to guide staff experts' cooperation and performance improvements.

The authors used a qualitative method for data collection and analysis of the experts' and line managers' explanations about their cooperation. A theoretical approach of experts' identity positioning, in terms of differences and similarities, was used in analyzing the interaction between managers and experts.

This study shows that similarities and differences in positioning acts exist simultaneously. Similarity is constructed by way of strategic and professional alignment with the line managers' core tasks. Differences stem from the distinction between knowledge-grounded skills and professional attributes such as language, analytical tools, and jargon. Lower-status experts need to leave their entrenched positions and match the professional status of line managers in both knowledge aspirations and appearance to reach a respected approach of experts' identity positioning.

Unlike many previous studies, this study demonstrates that similarities and differences in positioning acts exist simultaneously.

This paper aims to make it convenient for those who have only just begun their research into Community Question Answering (CQA) expert recommendation, and for those who are already concerned with this issue, to ease the extension of our understanding with future research.

In this paper, keywords such as “CQA”, “Social Question Answering”, “expert recommendation”, “question routing” and “expert finding” are used to search major digital libraries. The final sample includes a list of 83 relevant articles authored in academia as well as industry that have been published from January 1, 2008 to March 1, 2019.

This study proposes a comprehensive framework to categorize extant studies into three broad areas of CQA expert recommendation research: understanding profile modeling, recommendation approaches and recommendation system impacts.

This paper focuses on discussing and sorting out the key research issues from these three research genres. Finally, it was found that conflicting and contradictory research results and research gaps in the existing research, and then put forward the urgent research topics.