Willingness to incorporate external influences into research process will support strong basis for usable knowledge.

Researchers who are more open to external (non-academic) influences in their research are able to more easily share their research with users, stakeholders and partners. Researchers Julia Olmos, Paul Benneworth and Elena Castro studied researchers’ willingness to include influences from users in the overall research process

Neutralizing antibody-independent immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in hamsters and hACE-2 transgenic mice immunized with a RBD/Nucleocapsid fusion protein [preprint]

The nucleocapsid (N) and the receptor binding domain (RBD) of the Spike (S) proteins elicit robust antibody and T cell responses either in vaccinated or COVID-19 convalescent individuals. We generated a chimeric protein that comprises the sequences of RBD from S and N antigens (SpiN). SpiN was highly immunogenic and elicited a strong IFNγ response from T cells and high levels of antibodies to the inactivated virus, but no neutralizing antibodies. Importantly, hamsters and the human Angiotensin Convertase Enzyme-2-transgenic mice immunized with SpiN were highly resistant to challenge with the wild type SARS-CoV-2, as indicated by viral load, clinical outcome, lung inflammation and lethality. Thus, the N protein should be considered to induce T-cell-based immunity to improve SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, and eventually to circumvent the immune scape by variants

Sistema de actividades para enseñar ajedrez a niños de la escuela “Abel Santamaría Cuadrado”

The research refers to a system of activities to solve the insufficiency in learning, caused by the absence of a program capable of teaching chess to boys and girls at the age of five and six years in Preschool Education. Studying a sample belonging to the “Abel Santamaría Cuadrado” Primary School of San Antonio del Sur municipality, and using the scientific research methods of the empirical and theoretical level, the aforementioned proposal was achieved, which solved the problems raised in this work.La investigación hace referencia a un sistema de actividades para solucionar la insuficiencia en el aprendizaje, provocada por la ausencia de un programa capaz de enseñar ajedrez a niños y niñas en la edad de cinco y seis años en la Enseñanza Preescolar. Estudiando una muestra perteneciente a la Escuela Primaria “Abel Santamaría Cuadrado” del municipio San Antonio del Sur, y utilizando los métodos científicos de investigación del nivel empírico y teórico, se logró la propuesta antes mencionada, la cual solucionó la problemática planteada en este trabajo

A Validation Study of the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale with Urban Hispanic and African American Preschool Children

The development of culturally and linguistically appropriate measurement is necessary to enable accurate assessment of preschool children’s interpersonal competence and behavioral difficulties. This need is most pressing for children from Hispanic backgrounds, who currently represent the fastest growing population of U.S. children. The present study investigated the psychometric properties of a Spanish and English version of the Penn Interactive Peer Play Scale (PIPPS; Fantuzzo et al., 1995) when employed with Spanish- and English-speaking teachers and students in an urban, Southeastern community. Psychometrically sound structures were obtained with the Spanish translation of the PIPPS in support of the three original dimensions named Play Interaction, Play Disruption, and Play Disconnection, which were derived from studies of African American preschool children in lower income, Northeastern communities. Concurrent validity was supported by significant correlationsbetween the three Spanish PIPPS constructs and teacher ratings of externalizing and internalizing behavior problems. Significant group differences in class-room peer play interactions were also detected for children’s gender and ethnicity. The independent emergence of comparable Spanish and English PIPPS factor structures across two distinct regional samples provides initial support for use of this measure in research with Hispanic preschool children from low-income backgrounds. Implications for school psychologists engaging in outreach to preschool programs servicing diverse groups of children are discussed, including the generalizability of interactive peer play constructs for preschool children across racial, ethnic, linguistic, and geographic back-grounds

Explaining researchers' readiness to incorporate external stimuli in their research agendas

This paper seeks to provide a better understanding of how researchers incorporate external (non-academic) influences in their research process. Firstly we advance the notion of ‘openness’ as a researcher characteristic that describes researchers’ readiness to let external stimuli modify the different stages of the research cycle and we identify the kind of behavioural changes expected from ‘open’ researchers. Secondly, we look at the factors explaining researchers’ openness. We empirically analyse researchers’ openness drawing upon a database containing 1583 researchers from the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC). We found that researchers open in any stage of the research process tend to be also open through the rest of the stages. We also found that personal factors related to researchers’ identity and past experiences are key aspects that determine researchers’ openness. Policy implications are derived regarding suggestions to foster researchers’ opennes

Explaining researchers’ readiness to incorporate external stimuli in their research agendas

Ingenio Working Paper SeriesThis paper seeks to provide a better understanding of how researchers incorporate external (non-academic) influences in their research process. Firstly we advance the notion of ‘openness’ as a researcher characteristic that describes researchers’ readiness to let external stimuli modify the different stages of the research cycle and we identify the kind of behavioural changes expected from ‘open’ researchers. Secondly, we look at the factors explaining researchers’ openness. We empirically analyse researchers’ openness drawing upon a database containing 1583 researchers from the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC). We found that researchers open in any stage of the research process tend to be also open through the rest of the stages. We also found that personal factors related to researchers’ identity and past experiences are key aspects that determine researchers’ openness. Policy implications are derived regarding suggestions to foster researchers’ openness.The authors acknowledge the EU-Spri Forum for the PhD Circulation grant provided to Julia Olmos Peñuela and to the Center for Higher Education Policy Studies (CHEPS) as her host institution.N

Law of promotion of the autonomy and attention to the persons in dependence situation, an analysis of its application in Andalucia

En este artículo, en primer lugar, se contextualiza el Estado del Bienestar para, posteriormente, abordar el análisis de la Ley de la Dependencia como cuarto pilar de dicho Estado del Bienestar. Por último, se analiza la aplicación de esta Ley por parte de las diferentes comunidades autónomas españolas, poniendo de manifiesto las diferencias que existen entre las mismas; prestando especial atención a la aplicación que se viene desarrollando en Andalucía. Para ello se utilizan los datos que proporciona el IMSERSO a noviembre de 2009. A partir del análisis de estos datos se llega a concluir el importante esfuerzo que viene realizando Andalucía en lo que a la aplicación de esta Ley respecta en comparación al resto de comunidades autónomas españolas.__________________________________________First, We analyze the Welfare State, later, we analyze the Law of the Dependence as fourth prop of the Welfare State. Finally, we analyze the application of this Law on the part of the different Spanish autonomous communities, revealing the differences that exist between the same ones; giving special attention to the application in Andalusia. For this, we use the information that the IMSERSO provides to November, 2009. From the analysis of this information we conclude the important effort that comes realizing Andalucia in the application of this Law in comparison to the rest of Spanish autonomous communities

El crucifijo de las Agustinas Canónigas de Palencia, de Alejo de Vahia

Se da a conocer una nueva obra del prolífico escultor gótico Alejo de Vahía, activo en Becerril de Campos (Palencia) y ubicada en la clausura del convento de las Madres Agustinas Canónigas de Palencia. Además, se analizan el estilo y la tipología de sus crucificados, proponiéndose para esta pieza una cronología algo posterior al año 1500.A new work by the prolific gothic sculptor Alejo de Vahía active in Becerril de Campos (Palencia) is presented. The piece is placed inside the monastery of the closed order of the Agustinas Canónigas in Palencia. The style and typology of Vahia's crucifixes, are also analyzed, proposing for this work a chronology later than the year 1500

Does it take two to tango? Factors related to the ease of societal uptake of scientific knowledge

[EN] Science policy increasingly focuses on maximising societal benefits from science and technology investments, but often reduces those benefits to activities involving codifying and selling knowledge, thereby idealising best practice academic behaviours around entrepreneurial superstars. This paper argues that societal value depends on knowledge being used, making knowledge¿s eventual exploitation partly dependent upon on whether other users¿societal or scientific¿can use that knowledge (i.e. on how far new knowledge is cognate with users¿ existing knowledge). When scientists incorporate user knowledge into their research processes, what we call `open research behaviours¿, their knowledge may be more usable. We develop a set of hypotheses concerning whether researchers¿ personal and professional characteristics are associated with open research behaviours. We find evidence which suggests that, whilst personal characteristics are not associated with open research behaviours, researchers who experience professional signals validating open research behaviours are more likely to demonstrate such behaviours.The authors acknowledge the EU-SPRI Forum for the PhD Circulation grant provided to Julia Olmos-Penuela and to CHEPS as her host institution, and to the Conselleria d'Educacio, Cultura i Esport (Ref. APOSTD-2014-A-006) for the post-doctoral grant provided to Julia Olmos-Penuela. The authors acknowledge the CSIC and other IMPACTO project researchers (INGENIO and IESA) for their hard and very satisfactory work and the CSIC researchers whose answers to the questionnaire enabled us to develop the database. The authors would also like to thank Barend van der Meulen, the Rathenau Institute, The Hague, the Netherlands, for a comment on a presentation that inspired this paper, as well as to Laurens Hessels for his correspondence on the issue of research dynamism.Olmos-Peñuela, J.; Benneworth, P.; Castro-Martínez, E. (2016). Does it take two to tango? Factors related to the ease of societal uptake of scientific knowledge. Science and Public Policy (Online). 43(6):751-762. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scw016S751762436Adviesraad-voor-Wetenschaps (2007) ‘Alfa en Gamma stralen.Valorisatiebeleid voor de Alfa- en Gammawetenschappen’. Rijswijk, the Netherlands: Adviesraad voor Wetenschaps- en Technologiebeleid.Amin A. Cohendet P. (2004) Architectures of Knowledge: Firms, Capabilities, and Communities. Oxford, UK: OUP.Baldini, N., Grimaldi, R., & Sobrero, M. (2007). To patent or not to patent? A survey of Italian inventors on motivations, incentives, and obstacles to university patenting. Scientometrics, 70(2), 333-354. doi:10.1007/s11192-007-0206-5Bate J. (2011) The Public Value of the Humanities. London: Bloomsbury.Bateman T. S. Hess A. M. (2015) ‘Different personal propensities among scientists relate to deeper vs. broader knowledge contributions’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112: 3653–3658.Becher T. Trowler P. R. (2001) Academic Tribes and Territories Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.Behrens, T. R., & Gray, D. O. (2001). Unintended consequences of cooperative research: impact of industry sponsorship on climate for academic freedom and other graduate student outcome. Research Policy, 30(2), 179-199. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(99)00112-2Benner, C. (2003). Learning Communities in a Learning Region: The Soft Infrastructure of Cross-Firm Learning Networks in Silicon Valley. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 35(10), 1809-1830. doi:10.1068/a35238Benneworth, P. (2015). Tracing how arts and humanities research translates, circulates and consolidates in society.. How have scholars been reacting to diverse impact and public value agendas? Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 45-60. doi:10.1177/1474022214533888Benneworth P. Olmos-Peñuela J. (2014) ‘Resolving tensions of research utilization: The value of a usability-based approach’: INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series. Valencia: INGENIO.Boschma, R. (2005). Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment. Regional Studies, 39(1), 61-74. doi:10.1080/0034340052000320887Bozeman, B. (2000). Technology transfer and public policy: a review of research and theory. Research Policy, 29(4-5), 627-655. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(99)00093-1Bozeman, B. (2002). Public‐Value Failure: When Efficient Markets May Not Do. Public Administration Review, 62(2), 145-161. doi:10.1111/0033-3352.00165Bozeman B. (2012) ‘Public values concepts and criteria: The case for “progressive opportunity” as a criterion’. Paper prepared for Creating Public Values Conference, held 20–22 September 2012, Minneapolis, MN  accessed 23 Mar 2015.Brewer J. D. (2013) The Public Value of the Social Sciences: An Interpretive Essay. London: Bloomsbury.Breznitz, S. M., & Feldman, M. P. (2010). The engaged university. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(2), 139-157. doi:10.1007/s10961-010-9183-6Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (2012) ‘Memoria anual del CSIC 2011’. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas accessed 17 Sep 2013.Crossick G . (2009) ‘So who now believes in the transfer of widgets?’ Paper presented at Knowledge Future Conference, held 16–7 October 2009, London accessed 20 Nov 2011.Dance, A. (2013). Impact: Pack a punch. Nature, 502(7471), 397-398. doi:10.1038/nj7471-397aD’Este P. Llopis O. Yegros A. (2013) ‘Conducting pro-social research: Cognitive diversity, research excellence and awareness about the social impact of research’: INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series. Valencia: INGENIO.D’Este, P., & Perkmann, M. (2010). Why do academics engage with industry? The entrepreneurial university and individual motivations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(3), 316-339. doi:10.1007/s10961-010-9153-zDonovan, C. (2007). The qualitative future of research evaluation. Science and Public Policy, 34(8), 585-597. doi:10.3152/030234207x256538Elam, M., & Bertilsson, M. (2003). Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science. European Journal of Social Theory, 6(2), 233-251. doi:10.1177/1368431003006002005Fromhold-Eisebith M. Werker C. Vojnic M. (2014) ‘Tracing the social dimension in innovation networks’ in The Social Dynamics of Innovation Networks, Rutten R. Benneworth P. Irawati D. Boekema F. (eds), pp. 221–39. London: Routledge.Garland, R. (2012). The humanities: plain and simple. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 11(3), 300-312. doi:10.1177/1474022212438754Gertner, D., Roberts, J., & Charles, D. (2011). University‐industry collaboration: a CoPs approach to KTPs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 15(4), 625-647. doi:10.1108/13673271111151992Gibbons M. Limoges C. Nowotny H. Schwartzman S. . (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies. London: Sage.Gulbrandsen M. (2012) ‘“But Peter’s in it for the money”–the liminality of entrepreneurial scientists’. TIK Working Papers on Innovation Studies, No. 20120323 accessed 20 Mar 2015.Gulbrandsen, M., & Smeby, J.-C. (2005). Industry funding and university professors’ research performance. Research Policy, 34(6), 932-950. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.004Hanney S. R. Gonzalez-Block M. A. Buxton M. J. Kogan M. (2003) ‘The utilisation of health research in policy-making: Concepts, examples and methods of assessment’. Health Research Policy and Systems accessed 11 Feb 2016.Hessels, L. K., & van Lente, H. (2008). Re-thinking new knowledge production: A literature review and a research agenda. Research Policy, 37(4), 740-760. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.01.008Isaksen, A., & Karlsen, J. (2010). Different Modes of Innovation and the Challenge of Connecting Universities and Industry: Case Studies of Two Regional Industries in Norway. European Planning Studies, 18(12), 1993-2008. doi:10.1080/09654313.2010.516523Jacobson, N., Butterill, D., & Goering, P. (2004). Organizational Factors that Influence University-Based Researchers’ Engagement in Knowledge Transfer Activities. Science Communication, 25(3), 246-259. doi:10.1177/1075547003262038Kitcher P. (2003) ‘What kinds of science should be done?’ in Living with the Genie: Essays on Technology and the Quest for Human Mastery Lightman A. Sarewitz D. Desser C. (eds), pp. 201–24. Washington, DC: Island Press.Lam, A. (2011). What motivates academic scientists to engage in research commercialization: ‘Gold’, ‘ribbon’ or ‘puzzle’? Research Policy, 40(10), 1354-1368. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.002Latour B. Woolgar S. (1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. London: Sage.Lee, Y. S. (1996). ‘Technology transfer’ and the research university: a search for the boundaries of university-industry collaboration. Research Policy, 25(6), 843-863. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(95)00857-8Lee, Y. S. (2000). The Journal of Technology Transfer, 25(2), 111-133. doi:10.1023/a:1007895322042Lowe, R. A., & Gonzalez-Brambila, C. (2007). Faculty Entrepreneurs and Research Productivity. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 32(3), 173-194. doi:10.1007/s10961-006-9014-yNowotny H. Scott P. Gibbons M. (2001) Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Argentina: SciELO.O’Shea, R. P., Allen, T. J., Chevalier, A., & Roche, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994-1009. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2005.05.011Olmos-Penuela, J., Benneworth, P., & Castro-Martinez, E. (2013). Are «STEM from Mars and SSH from Venus»?: Challenging disciplinary stereotypes of research’s social value. Science and Public Policy, 41(3), 384-400. doi:10.1093/scipol/sct071Olmos-Peñuela, J., Benneworth, P., & Castro-Martínez, E. (2015). Are sciences essential and humanities elective? Disentangling competing claims for humanities’ research public value. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 14(1), 61-78. doi:10.1177/1474022214534081Olmos-Peñuela, J., Benneworth, P., & Castro-Martínez, E. (2015). What Stimulates Researchers to Make Their Research Usable? Towards an ‘Openness’ Approach. Minerva, 53(4), 381-410. doi:10.1007/s11024-015-9283-4Ramos-Vielba, I., Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M., & Woolley, R. (2015). Scientific research groups’ cooperation with firms and government agencies: motivations and barriers. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(3), 558-585. doi:10.1007/s10961-015-9429-4Rhoten, D., & Pfirman, S. (2007). Women in interdisciplinary science: Exploring preferences and consequences. Research Policy, 36(1), 56-75. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2006.08.001Roach, M., & Sauermann, H. (2010). A taste for science? PhD scientists’ academic orientation and self-selection into research careers in industry. Research Policy, 39(3), 422-434. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.01.004Salter, A. J., & Martin, B. R. (2001). The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review. Research Policy, 30(3), 509-532. doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(00)00091-3Sarewitz, D., & Pielke, R. A. (2007). The neglected heart of science policy: reconciling supply of and demand for science. Environmental Science & Policy, 10(1), 5-16. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2006.10.001New, B. (1997). The rationing debate: Defining a package of healthcare services the NHS is responsible for The case for. BMJ, 314(7079), 498-498. doi:10.1136/bmj.314.7079.498Shane, S. (2000). Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448-469. doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.448.14602Slaughter S. Leslie L. L. (1997) Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Small H. (2013) The Value of the Humanities. Oxford, UK: OUP.Spaapen, J., & van Drooge, L. (2011). Introducing «productive interactions» in social impact assessment. Research Evaluation, 20(3), 211-218. doi:10.3152/095820211x12941371876742Stephan, P. E., & Levin, S. G. (1993). Age and the Nobel prize revisited. Scientometrics, 28(3), 387-399. doi:10.1007/bf02026517Stokes D. E. (1997) Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Tartari, V., & Breschi, S. (2012). Set them free: scientists’ evaluations of the benefits and costs of university-industry research collaboration. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1117-1147. doi:10.1093/icc/dts004Thursby, J. G., & Thursby, M. C. (2004). Are Faculty Critical? Their Role in Universityâ Industry Licensing. Contemporary Economic Policy, 22(2), 162-178. doi:10.1093/cep/byh012Trowler P. Saunders M. Bamber V. (2012) Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education. New York: Taylor and Francis.Van Looy, B., Ranga, M., Callaert, J., Debackere, K., & Zimmermann, E. (2004). Combining entrepreneurial and scientific performance in academia: towards a compounded and reciprocal Matthew-effect? Research Policy, 33(3), 425-441. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2003.09.004Van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Hessels, L. K. (2011). Factors associated with disciplinary and interdisciplinary research collaboration. Research Policy, 40(3), 463-472. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2010.11.001Van Rijnsoever, F. J., Hessels, L. K., & Vandeberg, R. L. J. (2008). A resource-based view on the interactions of university researchers. Research Policy, 37(8), 1255-1266. doi:10.1016/j.respol.2008.04.020Weingart, P. (2009). Editorial for Issue 47/3. Minerva, 47(3), 237-239. doi:10.1007/s11024-009-9131-5Zahra, S. A., Van de Velde, E., & Larraneta, B. (2007). Knowledge conversion capability and the performance of corporate and university spin-offs. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(4), 569-608. doi:10.1093/icc/dtm018Zomer, A. H., Jongbloed, B. W. A., & Enders, J. (2010). Do Spin-Offs Make the Academics’ Heads Spin? Minerva, 48(3), 331-353. doi:10.1007/s11024-010-9154-

Knowledge transfer activities in Humanities and Social Sciences: which determinants explain research group interactions with non-academic agents?

Trabajo presentado a la DIME-DRUID Academy Winter Conference: "Economics and Management of Innovation, Technology and Organizations", celebrada en Aalborg (Dinamarca) del 20 al 22 de enero de 2011.In the current society, universities and research centers have acquired an important role as agents responsible for knowledge transfer (KT) to the non-academic environment (OCDE 1996). The different ways in which these collaborations take place have been the subject of many conceptual (Molas-Gallart et al. 2002) and empirical studies (D'Este and Patel 2007; Landry et al. 2007) in recent years. The aim of this exploratory study paper is to contribute to KT literature from an area of study generally neglected, humanities and social sciences (HSS), and from a unit analysis perspective that have received less attention: the research group. Thus, the questions addressed in this study are: what are the main activities of KT used by HSS research groups to collaborate with non-academic agents? Do group characteristics or group’ leader profile influence the group’ engagement in a specific knowledge transfer activity? Data for this study has been gathered through questionnaires, interviews and databases for a sample made up of 79 research groups (80% of the population) belonging to the HSS area of the Spanish Council for Scientific Research (CSIC). Descriptive and multivariate analyses have been conducted. Results indicate that HSS research groups are very active in some KT activities such as technical advice, consultancy and contract research, whereas their involvement in personal mobility activities is low. Logistic regression analysis shows that the likelihood that research groups engage in any KT activities is not explained by the same factors. However, we obtain evidence showing that there is a common variable positively related with the engagement of HSS research groups for almost all the different activities analyzed: the focus on the social utility of the research.The study benefited from financial support from the Spanish National R&D Plan (Ref.: SEJ2005-24033-E) and the Valencian Regional Government (Ref.: GV06/225).Peer reviewe