What are the factors that determine the types of questions that people commonly think make for a good question for scientists to answer?

The present online study investigates the properties of question that lay people agree on that makes a research question easy to understand, as well as worth answering. As yet there is limited understanding about the features of a question that in combination lead to an overall judgment that a question is good or not good. Graesser, Person, and Huber (1992) have proposed a GPH scheme that outlines two general features of questions that enable an overall assessment that a question is presented in a manner that makes it of value: “content” the structure of the information sought, “question-generation mechanism” the psychological processes––goals, plans, and knowledge––which bring about a question. The GPH Scheme lists also lists four specific properties that consider the question-generation mechanisms: 1) reducing, or correcting, a knowledge deficit; 2) monitoring common ground; 3) social coordination of action; and 4) control of conversation and attention. Up until now, there is no analysis of research questions based on the GPH scheme, and so the overall objective is to present participants with an online survey that is comprised of four sets of judgment probes that invite participants to consider a research question from the view of the following four properties of a question: 1) reducing, or correcting, a knowledge deficit; 2) monitoring common ground; 3) social coordination of action; and 4) control of conversation and attention. After they are presented with judgment probes related to each of these four properties, they will be invited to make an overall judgment as to whether they think the research question is worth answering, and the extent to which the research question is deemed a “good” question

What are the factors that determine the types of questions that people commonly think make for a good question for scientists to answer?

The present online study investigates the properties of question that lay people agree on that makes a research question easy to understand, as well as worth answering. As yet there is limited understanding about the features of a question that in combination lead to an overall judgment that a question is good or not good. Graesser, Person, and Huber (1992) have proposed a GPH scheme that outlines two general features of questions that enable an overall assessment that a question is presented in a manner that makes it of value: “content” the structure of the information sought, “question-generation mechanism” the psychological processes––goals, plans, and knowledge––which bring about a question. The GPH Scheme lists also lists four specific properties that consider the question-generation mechanisms: 1) reducing, or correcting, a knowledge deficit; 2) monitoring common ground; 3) social coordination of action; and 4) control of conversation and attention. Up until now, there is no analysis of research questions based on the GPH scheme, and so the overall objective is to present participants with an online survey that is comprised of four sets of judgment probes that invite participants to consider a research question from the view of the following four properties of a question: 1) reducing, or correcting, a knowledge deficit; 2) monitoring common ground; 3) social coordination of action; and 4) control of conversation and attention. After they are presented with judgment probes related to each of these four properties, they will be invited to make an overall judgment as to whether they think the research question is worth answering, and the extent to which the research question is deemed a “good” question

A taxonomy of policy questions: Examining the style of policy inquires

Abstract To help advance exchanges between science and policy, a useful first step is to examine the questions which policy professionals pose to scientists. The style of a question indicates what the asker is motivated to know, and how they might use that knowledge. Therefore, the aggregate pattern of typical policy inquires can help scientists anticipate what types of information policy audiences desire. A dataset (n = 2972) of questions from policy professionals collected over 10 years (2011–2021)––by the Centre for Science and Policy at the University of Cambridge––was classified into one of seven classes. In the main, the most popular questions posed by policy professionals––within the public and private sectors––were those whose answers inform how to achieve specific outcomes––whether directly, or by providing a causal analysis which is instrumental to this process. Moreover, this seems to be a general aspect of the nature of policy professionals’ inquiries, given that it is preserved regardless of the policy issue considered (e.g., Artificial intelligence, Economy, or Health). Thus, maximizing the usefulness of the information that policy professionals receive when engaging with scientists requires informing how to achieve specific outcomes––directly, or by providing a useful causal analysis.</jats:p

How do different groups judge the quality of research questions which inform evidence-based policymaking?

Science-policy co-production depends on successfully coordinating exchanges between different researchers and policymakers—acknowledging that they may vary in their interpretation of the problem and the questions that need addressing. In the UK, ‘Areas of Research Interest’ (ARI) are questions generated by government departments, agencies, and public bodies to invite responses from external experts, such as researchers. There are two broad aims, to communicate the information needs of government departments and to initiate a co-productive process. But are such questions assessed in the same way by policymakers and researchers? The present study examines the properties of questions to understand whether there is agreement across different groups (i.e. public N = 383, academia N = 182, public administration N = 211) regarding the types of questions which are judged to be better than others. The study presented participants with seven types of questions (Instrumental/Procedural, Causal Analytic, Verification/Qualification, Explanation/Example, Explaining/Asserting Value Judgments, Comparisons, and Forecasting) on the same topic (i.e. climate change) that varied in length (i.e. long vs. short), and that presented as either posed by policy professionals or researchers. Participants were required to assess questions based on quality of communication, neutrality, and overall goodness. The findings show that assessments were unaffected by proposer, sample, and demographics (e.g. age, gender, level of education). Of the seven types of questions investigated, Instrumental/Procedural type questions were rated the best. The implications of these findings are considered with respect to co-production between academia and policy

A taxonomy of policy questions: Examining style of policy inquires

To help advance exchanges between science and policy, a useful first step is to examine the questions that policy professionals pose to scientists. The structure of a question provides valuable indicators of what one is motivated to know, and what that knowledge might be used for. Therefore, understanding the pattern of inquiries typically made can helps scientists anticipate what types of knowledge policy audiences want from them. A data set (n = 2972 questions) of questions from policy professionals collected over 10 years (2011 – 2021) was classified into one of 7 classes of questions. In the main, policy professionals (public sector, private sector) invite answers that typically increase their causal understanding of a policy issue, and that included suggested plans of action they can consider implementing. Moreover, these seem to be general aspects of the nature of inquiry of policy professionals, given that the preserve regardless of policy issue (e.g., Artificial intelligence, Economy, Health). Thus, to maximize the utility of their knowledge in science-policy exchanges involves an applied approach of communicating mechanisms to inform the actions that could be taken

What are the factors that determine the types of questions that people commonly think make for a good question for scientists to answer?

The present online study investigates the properties of question that lay people agree on that makes a research question easy to understand, as well as worth answering. As yet there is limited understanding about the features of a question that in combination lead to an overall judgment that a question is good or not good. Graesser, Person, and Huber (1992) have proposed a GPH scheme that outlines two general features of questions that enable an overall assessment that a question is presented in a manner that makes it of value: “content” the structure of the information sought, “question-generation mechanism” the psychological processes––goals, plans, and knowledge––which bring about a question. The GPH Scheme lists also lists four specific properties that consider the question-generation mechanisms: 1) reducing, or correcting, a knowledge deficit; 2) monitoring common ground; 3) social coordination of action; and 4) control of conversation and attention. Up until now, there is no analysis of research questions based on the GPH scheme, and so the overall objective is to present participants with an online survey that is comprised of four sets of judgment probes that invite participants to consider a research question from the view of the following four properties of a question: 1) reducing, or correcting, a knowledge deficit; 2) monitoring common ground; 3) social coordination of action; and 4) control of conversation and attention. After they are presented with judgment probes related to each of these four properties, they will be invited to make an overall judgment as to whether they think the research question is worth answering, and the extent to which the research question is deemed a “good” question

A taxonomy of policy questions: Examining style of policy inquires

To help advance exchanges between science and policy, a useful first step is to examine the questions that policy professionals pose to scientists. The structure of a question provides valuable indicators of what one is motivated to know, and what that knowledge might be used for. Therefore, understanding the pattern of inquiries typically made can helps scientists anticipate what types of knowledge policy audiences want from them. A data set (n = 2972 questions) of questions from policy professionals collected over 10 years (2011 – 2021) was classified into one of 7 classes of questions. In the main, policy professionals (public sector, private sector) invite answers that typically increase their causal understanding of a policy issue, and that included suggested plans of action they can consider implementing. Moreover, these seem to be general aspects of the nature of inquiry of policy professionals, given that the preserve regardless of policy issue (e.g., Artificial intelligence, Economy, Health). Thus, to maximize the utility of their knowledge in science-policy exchanges involves an applied approach of communicating mechanisms to inform the actions that could be taken.</p

Synthesis of Hyperbranched Poly(aryl ether)s via Carbene Insertion Processes

Homopolymerization of alkylarylcarbenes derived from diazirine monomers that featured benzyl alcohol or phenol residues was found to lead to the production of soluble hyperbranched poly(aryl ether)s. The polymerization process was influenced by the solvents employed, monomer concentration, and the reaction time. An increase in the monomer concentration and reaction time was found to lead to an increase in the molecular weight characteristics of the resulting polymers as determined by gel permeation chromatography (GPC). The composition and architecture of the polyethers were determined by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopic analysis and were found to be highly complex and dependent on the structure of the monomers used. All of the polymers were found to contain ether linkages formed via carbene insertion into O−H bonds, although polymers derived from phenolic carbenes also contained linkages arising from C-alkylation

Synthesis of Hyperbranched Poly(aryl ether)s via Carbene Insertion Processes

Homopolymerization of alkylarylcarbenes derived from diazirine monomers that featured benzyl alcohol or phenol residues was found to lead to the production of soluble hyperbranched poly(aryl ether)s. The polymerization process was influenced by the solvents employed, monomer concentration, and the reaction time. An increase in the monomer concentration and reaction time was found to lead to an increase in the molecular weight characteristics of the resulting polymers as determined by gel permeation chromatography (GPC). The composition and architecture of the polyethers were determined by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopic analysis and were found to be highly complex and dependent on the structure of the monomers used. All of the polymers were found to contain ether linkages formed via carbene insertion into O−H bonds, although polymers derived from phenolic carbenes also contained linkages arising from C-alkylation