Public relations research priorities: a Delphi study

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify and rank the most important topics for research in the field of public relations. An associated outcome was to propose the research questions most closely linked to the prioritised topics. Design/methodology/approach – An international Delphi study on the priorities for public relations research, conducted in 2007 amongst academics, practitioners and senior executives of professional and industry bodies was used to investigate expert opinion on research priorities for public relations. This choice of qualitative methodology replicated earlier studies by McElreath, White and Blamphin, Synnott and McKie, and Van Ruler et al. Findings – The role of public relations in the strategic operation of organisations, and the creation of value by public relations through social capital and relationships were ranked most highly. Some outcomes were comparable with earlier studies; for instance, evaluation of public relations programmes ranked third in this study and was amongst the leaders in the Synnott and McKie study. Only the topic “management of relationships” was wholly new, whereas “impact of technology on public relations practice and theory” ranked much lower than a decade ago. Research limitations/implications – The Delphi study method is a small scale qualitative process which limits generalisability, unless the choice of “experts” and their active participation can demonstrate that there is validity in its outcomes. Practical implications – The research gives valuable insight into the main public relations research areas and will allow academics and practitioners to work closely together to improve understanding of public relations. Originality/value – This is the first completed Delphi study into public relations research priorities since Synnott and McKie

Improved precision with Hologic Apex software.

UnlabelledThe precision of Hologic Apex v2.0 analysis software is significantly improved from Hologic Delphi v11.2 software and is comparable to GE Lunar Prodigy v7.5 software. Apex and Delphi precisions were, respectively, 1.0% vs. 1.2% (L1-L4 spine), 1.l % vs. 1.3% (total femur), 1.6% vs. 1.9% (femoral neck), and 0.7% vs. 0.9% (dual total femur).IntroductionPrecision of bone mineral density (BMD) measurements by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) is known to vary by manufacturer, model, and technologist. This study evaluated the precision of three analysis versions: Apex v2.0 and Delphi v11.2 (Hologic, Inc.), and Prodigy v7.5 (GE Healthcare, Inc.) independent of technologist skill.MethodsDuplicate spine and dual hip scans on 90 women were acquired on both Delphi and Prodigy DXA systems at three clinics. BMD measures were converted to standardized BMD (sBMD) units. Precision errors were described as a root-mean-square (RMS) standard deviations and RMS percent coefficients of variation across the population.ResultsApex and Delphi values were highly correlated (r ranged from 0.90 to 0.99). Excluding the right neck, the Apex precision error was found to be 20% to 25% lower than the Delphi (spine: 1.0% versus 1.2% (p < 0.05), total hip: 1.1% versus 1.3% (p < 0.05), right neck: 2.3% versus 2.6% (p > 0.1)). No statistically significant differences were found in the precision error of the Apex and Prodigy (p > 0.05) except for the right neck (2.3% versus 1.8% respectively, p = 0.03).ConclusionThe Apex software has significantly lower precision error compared to Delphi software with similar mean values, and similar precision to that of the Prodigy

Priorities in public relations research: An international Delphi study

A Delphi study on the priorities for public relations research, conducted in 2007 amongst academics, practitioners and senior executives of professional and industry bodies in five continents, has ranked the ten most important topics for research and proposed the associated research questions. This is the first completed Delphi study into public relations research since Synnott and McKie (1997) which was itself a development of earlier studies of this type by McElreath (1980, 1989 and 1994). Some of the outcomes are comparable with the earlier studies; for instance, evaluation of public relations programmes ranks third in 2007 and was amongst the leaders in the Synnott and McKie (1997) study. After piloting, twenty six public relations topics were chosen. These were sent by email to the Delphi panel. After three rounds of intensive email debate, the Top Ten public relation research topics were in ranked order: 1) Public relations’ role in contributing to strategic decision-making, strategy development and realisation, and organisational functioning 2) The value that public relations creates for organisations through building social capital, managing key relationships and realising organisational advantage 3) The measurement and evaluation of public relations, both offline and online 4) Public relations as a fundamental management function 5) Professional skills in public relations; analysis of the industry’s need for education 6) Research into standards of performance among PR professionals; the licensing of practitioners 7) Management of corporate reputation; measurement of reputation 8) Ethics in public relations 9) Integration of public relations with other communication functions; the scope of public relations practice; discipline boundaries 10) Management of relationship

A Delphi survey to determine how educational interventions for evidence-based practice should be reported:Stage 2 of the development of a reporting guideline

BACKGROUND: Undertaking a Delphi exercise is recommended during the second stage in the development process for a reporting guideline. To continue the development for the Guideline for Reporting Evidence-based practice Educational interventions and Teaching (GREET) a Delphi survey was undertaken to determine the consensus opinion of researchers, journal editors and educators in evidence-based practice (EBP) regarding the information items that should be reported when describing an educational intervention for EBP. METHODS: A four round online Delphi survey was conducted from October 2012 to March 2013. The Delphi panel comprised international researchers, educators and journal editors in EBP. Commencing with an open-ended question, participants were invited to volunteer information considered important when reporting educational interventions for EBP. Over three subsequent rounds participants were invited to rate the importance of each of the Delphi items using an 11 point Likert rating scale (low 0 to 4, moderate 5 to 6, high 7 to 8 and very high >8). Consensus agreement was set a priori as at least 80 per cent participant agreement. Consensus agreement was initially calculated within the four categories of importance (low to very high), prior to these four categories being merged into two (<7 and ≥7). Descriptive statistics for each item were computed including the mean Likert scores, standard deviation (SD), range and median participant scores. Mean absolute deviation from the median (MAD-M) was also calculated as a measure of participant disagreement. RESULTS: Thirty-six experts agreed to participate and 27 (79%) participants completed all four rounds. A total of 76 information items were generated across the four survey rounds. Thirty-nine items (51%) were specific to describing the intervention (as opposed to other elements of study design) and consensus agreement was achieved for two of these items (5%). When the four rating categories were merged into two (<7 and ≥7), 18 intervention items achieved consensus agreement. CONCLUSION: This Delphi survey has identified 39 items for describing an educational intervention for EBP. These Delphi intervention items will provide the groundwork for the subsequent consensus discussion to determine the final inclusion of items in the GREET, the first reporting guideline for educational interventions in EBP

An Investigation into the attitudes of academic librarians towards Internet plagiarism of HE students using a Delphi study

This presentation will outline the findings of a study undertaken to investigate the attitudes of academic librarians towards Internet plagiarism by Higher Education students in the United Kingdom. A Delphi study – with its potential to yield rich qualitative data – was chosen as the most appropriate research tool for the study. A Delphi study is defined by its distinct stages. Key components include securing a sufficient number of qualified participants followed by the iterative process of preparation and distribution of questionnaires, analysis of responses and feedback to participants. For the purposes of this research qualified participation consisted of academic librarians who possessed the knowledge and/or practical experience of teaching about plagiarism and the Internet

Study of gluon fragmentation and colour octet neutralization in DELPHI

Using the full statistics of the DELPHI experiment at $\sqrt{s}=91 GeV$ 3-jet events are selected and gluon respectively quark jet enriched subsamples are defined. The leading systems of the two kinds of jets are determined using rapidity gaps. The sum of charges of the leading systems is studied. It is found that for gluon-jets there is a significant excess of leading systems with total charge zero when compared to Monte Carlo simulations with JETSET. The corresponding leading systems of quark-jets do not exhibit such an excess. The mass spectra of the leading systems with total charge zero are studied.Comment: 8 pages, 6 figures (in eps) talk given at XXXI International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics, Sep. 1-7, 2001, Datong China URL http://ismd31.ccnu.edu.cn

Expert consensus regarding drivers of antimicrobial stewardship in companion animal veterinary practice: a Delphi study

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global challenge facing both human and animal healthcare professionals; an effective response to this threat requires a ‘One-Health’ approach to antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) to preserve important antibiotics for urgent clinical need. However, understanding of barriers and enablers to effective AMS behaviour in companion animal veterinary practice is currently limited. We conducted a Delphi study of 16 nationally recognised experts from UK-based veterinary policymakers, university academics and leaders of professional bodies. This Delphi study sought to identify veterinary behaviours which experts believe contribute to AMR and form vital aspects of AMS. Analysis of Delphi findings indicated a perceived hierarchy of behaviours, the most influential being antibiotic prescribing behaviours and interactions with clients. Other veterinary behaviours perceived as being important related to interactions with veterinary colleagues; infection control practices; and the use of diagnostic tests to confirm infection. Key barriers and enablers to AMS within each of these behavioural domains were identified. Specific interventions to address important barriers and enablers are recommended. To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to establish expert consensus at a national level about which ‘behaviours’ (aspects of veterinarian practice) should be targeted in relation to AMR and AMS in companion animal veterinary practice

Delphi Technique in Poverty Alleviation: A Case Study

This study aims at investigating scholars thinking intended for poverty alleviation. Two-round Delphi techniques were applied to attain experts’ opinion in support of probable resolution of poverty. Government officials, Non-government executives, University academics, and social & political personalities are considered as scholars. The scholars think that limitation of job is the fundamental cause of poverty that is why the poor are bound to live in vulnerable unhygienic places where inadequate services are prevailing. They also argued that by providing home-based work and especial training that will help them to get job for income generation, the poverty problems could be reduced. As well community-based management similar to labor intensive low-cost housing factory and sanitation plant will also been lead to decrease poverty. To avoid hypothetical discover, the study analyzed poverty alleviation activities of UNDP/GOB project. The UNDP/GOB project entitled ‘Local Partnerships for Urban Poverty Alleviation’ is one of the biggest urban poverty alleviating projects in Bangladesh. There are many successful activities of this project such as community-based micro-credit, sanitation as well as drinking water has been highlighted. The study was undertaken by acquiring primary data from the field survey that employed a structure questionnaire and gathered information emphasis on poverty. Heads of poor households or a member behalf of HH, were used as respondents.

Overcoming Expert Disagreement In A Delphi Process. An Exercise In Reverse Epistemology

Disagreement among experts is a central topic in social epistemology. What should an expert do when confronted with the different opinion of an epistemic peer? Possible answers include the steadfast view (holding to one’s belief), the abstemious view (suspending one’s judgment), and moderate conciliatory views, which specify criteria for belief change when a peer’s different opinion is encountered. The practice of Delphi techniques in healthcare, medicine, and social sciences provides a real-life case study of expert disagreement, where disagreement is gradually transformed into consensus. An analysis of Delphi shows that moderate conciliatory views are descriptively more adequate than rival views. However, it also casts doubt on whether the debate in social epistemology is explanatory relevant vis-à-vis real life cases of expert disagreement, where consensus replaces truth, and acceptance is more explanatorily relevant than belief