Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Revealing research preferences in conservation science

  • Jasper Montana (a1), Chris Sandbrook (a2), Ellen Robertson (a3) and Melanie Ryan (a4)

Abstract

Conservation researchers are increasingly drawing on a wide range of philosophies, methods and values to examine conservation problems. Here we adopt methods from social psychology to develop a questionnaire with the dual purpose of illuminating diversity within conservation research communities and providing a tool for use in cross-disciplinary dialogue workshops. The questionnaire probes the preferences that different researchers have with regards to conservation science. It elicits insight into their motivations for carrying out research, the scales at which they tackle problems, the subjects they focus on, their beliefs about the connections between nature and society, their sense of reality as absolute or socially constituted, and their propensity for collaboration. Testing the questionnaire with a group of 204 conservation scientists at a student conference on conservation science, we illustrate the latent and multidimensional diversity in the research preferences held by conservation scientists. We suggest that creating opportunities to further explore these differences and similarities using facilitated dialogue could enrich the mutual understanding of the diverse research community in the conservation field.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Revealing research preferences in conservation science
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Revealing research preferences in conservation science
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Revealing research preferences in conservation science
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

(Corresponding author) E-mail jasper.montana@ouce.ox.ac.uk

Footnotes

Hide All

Supplementary material for this article is available at https://doi.org/10.1017/S003060531900067X

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Adams, W.M. (2007) Thinking like a human: social science and the two cultures problem. Oryx, 41, 275276.
Bennett, N.J., Roth, R., Klain, S.C., Chan, K., Christie, P., Clark, D.A. et al. (2017) Conservation social science: understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation. Biological Conservation, 205, 93108.
Bennett, N.J., Roth, R., Klain, S.C., Chan, K.M.A., Clark, D.A., Cullman, G. et al. (2016) Mainstreaming the social sciences in conservation. Conservation Biology, 31, 5666.
Berkes, F. & Folke, C. (1998) Linking Social and Ecological Systems: Management Practices and Social Mechanisms for Building Resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Binder, C.R., Absenger-Helmli, I. & Schilling, T. (2015) The reality of transdisciplinarity: a framework-based self-reflection from science and practice leaders. Sustainability Science, 10, 545562.
Blackford, S. (2010) A qualitative study of the relationship of personality type with career management and career choice preference in a group of bioscience postgraduate students and postdoctoral researchers. International Journal for Researcher Development, 1, 296313.
Bridges, W. (2010) The Character of Organizations: Using Personality Type in Organization Development. Davies-Black, London, UK.
Campbell, L.M. (2005) Overcoming obstacles to interdisciplinary research. Conservation Biology, 19, 574577.
Colloff, M.J., Lavorel, S., van Kerkhoff, L.E., Wyborn, C.A., Fazey, I., Gorddard, R. et al. (2017) Transforming conservation science and practice for a postnormal world. Conservation Biology, 31, 10081017.
Cox, M. (2015) A basic guide for empirical environmental social science. Ecology and Society, 20, 63.
Díaz, S., Demissew, S., Joly, C., Lonsdale, W.M. & Larigauderie, A. (2015) A Rosetta stone for nature's benefits to people. PLOS Biology, 13, e1002040.
Douthwaite, B., Kuby, T., van de Fliert, E. & Schulz, S. (2003) Impact pathway evaluation: an approach for achieving and attributing impact in complex systems. Agricultural Systems, 78, 243265.
Eigenbrode, S.D., O'Rourke, M., Wulfhorst, J.D., Althoff, D.M., Goldberg, C.S., Merrill, K. et al. (2007) Employing philosophical dialogue in collaborative science. BioScience, 57, 5564.
Eiser, J. (1986) Social Psychology: Attitudes, Cognition and Social Behaviour. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Field, A. (2009) Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. 3rd edition. Sage Publications, London, UK.
Fox, H.E., Christian, C., Nordby, J.C., Pergams, O.R.W., Peterson, G.D. & Pyke, C.R. (2006) Perceived barriers to integrating social science and conservation. Conservation Biology, 20, 18171820.
Kaiser, H.F. (1974) An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39, 3136.
Latour, B. (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, USA.
Mace, G. (2014) Whose conservation? Science, 345, 15581560.
Margulies, J.D., Magliocca, N.R., Schmill, M.D. & Ellis, E.C. (2016) Ambiguous geographies: connecting case study knowledge with global change science. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 106, 572596.
Mascia, M.B., Brosius, J.P., Dobson, T.A., Forbes, B.C., Horowitz, L., McKean, M.A. et al. (2003) Conservation and the social sciences. Conservation Biology, 17, 649650.
Meine, C., SoulÉ, M. & Noss, R.F. (2006) “A mission-driven discipline”: the growth of conservation biology. Conservation Biology, 20, 631651.
Moon, K. & Blackman, D. (2014) A guide to understanding social science research for natural scientists. Conservation Biology, 28, 11671177.
Nel, J.L., Roux, D.J., Driver, A., Hill, L., Maherry, A.C., Snaddon, K. et al. (2016) Knowledge co-production and boundary work to promote implementation of conservation plans. Conservation Biology, 30, 176188.
O'Brien, K., Reams, J., Caspari, A., Dugmore, A., Faghihimani, M., Fazey, I. et al. (2013) You say you want a revolution? Transforming education and capacity building in response to global change. Environmental Science & Policy, 28, 4859.
O'Rourke, M. & Crowley, S.J. (2013) Philosophical intervention and cross-disciplinary science: the story of the toolbox project. Synthese, 190, 19371954.
Pooley, S.P., Mendelsohn, J.A. & Milner-Gulland, E.J. (2014) Hunting down the chimera of multiple disciplinarity in conservation science. Conservation Biology, 28, 2232.
Proctor, J.D. (1998) The social construction of nature: relativist accusations, pragmatist and critical realist responses. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 88, 352376.
Sandbrook, C. (2015) What is conservation? Oryx, 49, 565566.
Sandbrook, C., Adams, W.M., Büscher, B. & Vira, B. (2013) Social research and biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology, 27, 14871490.
Saunders, C.D., Brook, A.T. & Eugene Myers, O. Jr (2006) Using psychology to save biodiversity and human well-being. Conservation Biology, 20, 702705.
Selinske, M.J., Garrard, G.E., Bekessy, S.A., Gordon, A., Kusmanoff, A.M. & Fidler, F. (2018) Revisiting the promise of conservation psychology. Conservation Biology, 32, 14641468.
Sievanen, L., Campbell, L.M. & Leslie, H.M. (2012) Challenges to interdisciplinary research in ecosystem-based management. Conservation Biology, 26, 315323.
St John, F.A.V., Edward-Jones, G. & Jones, J.P.G. (2010) Conservation and human behaviour: lessons from social psychology. Wildlife Research, 37, 648667.
Sutherland, W.J., Shackelford, G. & Rose, D.C. (2017) Collaborating with communities: co-production or co-assessment? Oryx, 51, 569570.
Whatmore, S. (2002) Hybrid Geographies: Natures, Cultures, Spaces. Sage, London, UK.

Keywords

Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Montana et al. supplementary material
Montana et al. supplementary material

 PDF (369 KB)
369 KB

Revealing research preferences in conservation science

  • Jasper Montana (a1), Chris Sandbrook (a2), Ellen Robertson (a3) and Melanie Ryan (a4)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed