【英語論文の書き方】第76回 「研究結果がもたらす影響を考える」について

2020年7月27日 11時58分

第75回では「Plagiarism(剽窃)を避ける」を取り上げました。

第76(今回)のテーマは
「研究結果がもたらす影響を考える」についてです。

論文のDiscussionにおける主要目標のひとつは、
研究から学んだことがもたらす影響について論じることです。

ここで言う影響とは、直接的であっても間接的であっても、
研究で得た知識を使うことにより生じ得るものを意味しています。

研究の結果は、自分の研究分野だけではなく、
分野外に広がる世界に対しても影響をもたらします。
また、その影響のすべてが科学に関係しているわけではなく、
有益なことであるとも限りません。

研究における問題は、様々なコンテクストのなかで起こりますが、
研究結果が社会や世界に広範囲にもたらす影響は、
特にそれがネガティブな結果を招く可能性を持つのであれば、
無視をすることはできません。

Discussionを書く際には、ご自身の研究結果が分野を超えて
与え得る影響について考え、有益な効果とネガティブな効果のそれぞれに対し、どのような提案ができるか思考を巡らせてみてください。

今回の記事では、考慮しなければいけない影響のカテゴリーとして、
7つの項目(科学的、方法論的、経済学的、倫理的、社会的、政治的、
将来の研究)が挙げられています。

Geoffさんが例を織り交ぜながら説明してくれましたので、
読み易い内容となっているかと思います。ぜひご参考ください。

Considering the implications of your results By Geoffrey Hart

One key goal in the Discussion section of a paper is to discuss the implications of what you learned from your research. (Implications are both the direct and the indirect consequences of using your knowledge.) Research results have implications both for your field of research and for the world that lies outside of that field. If you set out to solve a problem in your research, and succeed, the positive implications are clear: you have solved the problem. But not all implications relate to science and not all are beneficial. Research problems occur within a broader context (e.g., human society, the global environment), and you can’t ignore the wider consequences of your results for society and the world, particularly for potentially negative consequences. When you write the Discussion, spend some time towards the end of that section considering what areas other than your field of science will be affected by your results. For beneficial effects, provide recommendations on how to achieve those benefits. For negative effects, provide suggestions on how to shift the consequences more towards the good end of the spectrum and away from the negative end of the spectrum (i.e., to mitigate the consequences).
There are several categories of implications you should consider:
  • Scientific
  • Methodological
  • Economic
  • Ethical
  • Social
  • Political
  • Future research
Some of these categories of implications may not be relevant for a given research project. The more narrowly focused your paper is on some aspect of science, the fewer of these categories will be relevant. For example, a field study of the effects of climate change on human society will probably have implications in all of these categories, whereas a lab study designed to improve a specific analytical method may have primarily methodological implications. The more interdisciplinary your research is, and the more it exists within a human social context, the more categories will be relevant. Also note that some of these categories overlap. The important point about this list is to take a moment to consider whether each category is relevant, not to find ways to include all of these categories in every paper that you write.

Scientific implications

   Scientific implications are usually the most obvious, since they relate directly to your research questions. Those questions define what problems you hoped to solve or were forced to solve to complete your research, and what specific knowledge you hoped to contribute to your field of research: knowledge where knowledge was formerly lacking, confirmation of previous research (either as replication of an older study or as repetition of an older study in a new context), new methods, improvements of old methods, evidence or knowledge that complements or builds on or contradicts previous knowledge, and so on. In short, any way that your new knowledge will affect the overall understanding of some aspect of your field or guide future research represents an implication for science.

Methodological implications

    Methodological implications include any innovations you developed to help you do your research faster, more accurately, or less expensively (thereby making the method usable in more studies). These implications also include problems you were not able to solve and that must be solved in future research. For example, if your sample size proved to be too small because you found high variation in your study system, this may have led to weak or non-significant results. Stating this explicitly will help future researchers avoid that problem and do better research by increasing their sample size.

Economic implications

     Economic implications relate most obviously to monetary issues. Less obviously, they relate to how new knowledge will guide the operation of economic systems, which go far beyond flows of money to include flows of resources and energy within human systems such as cities. (Consider, for example, the field of economic ecology.) In monetary terms, the implications include the question of whether the cost of your research can be justified by the results, which means that they can be justified by the economic benefits provided by your research (e.g., improved livelihoods, decreased costs, increased profits, reduced ecological damage). In terms of flows of energy and materials, your new knowledge can provide insights into better ways to achieve sustainable development without excessive cost to human economies, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, or to reduce pollution outputs.

Ethical implications

      Ethical implications consider the consequences in terms of their effect on humans or on the thing you studied. It’s often said that science is ethically neutral, and although that’s true to a large extent, the consequences of applying that science are not always neutral. If your results show us how to save lives, restore ecosystems, or reduce the pain or suffering of humans and lab animals, they have clear beneficial ethical implications. But in a world where people are dying of preventable diseases and living in poverty and starvation, it’s also worth asking yourself whether you could redirect your research in a way that would help solve some of those problems.

Social implications

     Social implications relate to how humans interact with their institutions (e.g., government, religion) and with other humans within a human society. Research that relates to technology (i.e., to applied science) has the clearest social implications. For example, if you’re working on better image recognition algorithms, ask yourself whether and how those algorithms could be misapplied to adversely affect people, particularly people in groups that have traditionally been feared or distrusted or discriminated against by the dominant society. If your knowledge could lead to changes in how a social institution operates, consider whether those changes are desirable, and explain any precautions that should be taken to prevent undesirable changes.

Political implications

    Political implications relate to the effects of scientific research on how governments develop and implement policies related to humans, the environment, and science itself. For science that will support government policy, carefully consider the effects of your new knowledge for the physical and biological world and for human institutions. For example, many ecological restoration programs are eagerly adopted by governments based on their ability to restore a degraded ecosystem, but without considering the impacts of the programs on people who live in the areas affected by the programs. This often happens when a government establishes a nature reserve in an area where traditional hunter-gatherers live. These people may no longer be allowed to live in the reserve once it has been established. In such contexts, it’s necessary to develop solutions that both restore the environment and find alternative livelihoods for the people who lose their employment once the program is implemented.

Future research

     In most journals, it’s traditional to conclude your paper with suggestions for future research. In terms of what comes next in your research plan, consider what questions your results raised. It’s a truism that research generally leads to new questions rather than to final answers, which is one reason why research is such a fascinating profession. What questions was your study unable to answer that should still be answered? What do we still not fully understand? Propose testable explanations (i.e., hypotheses) based on your new understanding of your study system, and inspire other researchers to test those hypotheses—or to work with you to test them!
Also describe the limitations of your research by carefully constraining your results. Are your results preliminary, or definitive? What situations do they apply to and not apply to? If you performed a sensitivity analysis, how vulnerable are your results to flaws in your assumptions about parameter values and other factors that affect the results? Are the assumptions valid, in general terms, or do they require more research to obtain better assumptions and more reliable results? Are your results plausible and realistic? If they have statistical significance, do they also have practical (real-world) significance?

Research in context

     Some of the examples I listed could be legitimately classified into two categories. For example, the establishment of nature reserves has both political implications (the need to find alternative livelihoods for people displaced by the reserve) and ethical implications (the disruption of a traditional society that may have existed in the reserve area for thousands of years). In those cases, it’s necessary to examine the tradeoffs between the beneficial and negative consequences to see if a compromise can be found. For example, the traditional inhabitants could be employed to protect the land where they live, to provide ecotourism opportunities, or even to continue their traditional activities without interference; often, their activities have preserved the ecosystem, and it is the activities by outsiders that are the true problem.
Even the most abstract, purely scientific research is performed within a specific context, whether the context is scientific or social. Understanding this wider context enriches your research and makes it valuable to a wider range of potential readers.
 

無料メルマガ登録

メールアドレス
お名前

これからも約2週間に一度のペースで、英語で論文を書く方向けに役立つコンテンツをお届けしていきますので、お見逃しのないよう、上記のフォームよりご登録ください。
 
もちろん無料です。

バックナンバー

第1回 if、in case、when の正しい使い分け:確実性の程度を英語で正しく表現する

第2回 「装置」に対する英語表現

第3回 助動詞のニュアンスを正しく理解する:「~することが出来た」「~することが出来なかった」の表現

第4回 「~を用いて」の表現:by と with の違い

第5回 技術英文で使われる代名詞のitおよび指示代名詞thisとthatの違いとそれらの使用法

第6回 原因・結果を表す動詞の正しい使い方:その1 原因→結果

第7回 原因・結果を表す動詞の使い方:その2 結果→原因

第8回 受動態の多用と誤用に注意

第9回 top-heavyな英文を避ける

第10回 名詞の修飾語を前から修飾する場合の表現法

第11回 受動態による効果的表現

第12回 同格を表す接続詞thatの使い方

第13回 「技術」を表す英語表現

第14回 「特別に」を表す英語表現

第15回 所有を示すアポストロフィー + s ( ’s) の使い方

第16回 「つまり」「言い換えれば」を表す表現

第17回 寸法や重量を表す表現

第18回 前置詞 of の使い方: Part 1

第19回 前置詞 of の使い方: Part 2

第20回 物体や物質を表す英語表現

第21回 句動詞表現より1語動詞での表現へ

第22回 不定詞と動名詞: Part 1

第23回 不定詞と動名詞の使い分け: Part 2

第24回 理由を表す表現

第25回 総称表現 (a, theの使い方を含む)

第26回研究開発」を表す英語表現

第27回 「0~1の数値は単数か複数か?」

第28回 「時制-現在形の動詞の使い方」

第29回  then, however, therefore, for example など接続副詞の使い方​

第30回  まちがえやすいusing, based onの使い方-分詞構文​

第31回  比率や割合の表現(ratio, rate, proportion, percent, percentage)

第32回 英語論文の書き方 総集編

第33回 Quality Review Issue No. 23 report, show の時制について​

第34回 Quality Review Issue No. 24 参考文献で日本語論文をどう記載すべきか​

第35回 Quality Review Issue No. 25 略語を書き出すときによくある間違いとは?​

第36回 Quality Review Issue No. 26 %と℃の前にスペースを入れるかどうか

第37回 Quality Review Issue No. 27 同じ種類の名詞が続くとき冠詞は付けるべき?!​

第38回 Quality Review Issue No. 22  日本人が特に間違えやすい副詞の使い方​

第39回 Quality Review Issue No. 21  previous, preceding, earlierなどの表現のちがい

第40回 Quality Review Issue No. 20 using XX, by XXの表現の違い

第41回 Quality Review Issue No. 19 increase, rise, surgeなど動詞の選び方

第42回 Quality Review Issue No. 18 論文での受動態の使い方​

第43回 Quality Review Issue No. 17  Compared with とCompared toの違いは?​

第44回 Reported about, Approach toの前置詞は必要か?​

第45回 Think, propose, suggest, consider, believeの使い分け​

第46回 Quality Review Issue No. 14  Problematic prepositions scientific writing: by, through, and with -3つの前置詞について​

第47回 Quality Review Issue No. 13 名詞を前から修飾する場合と後ろから修飾する場合​

第48回 Quality Review Issue No. 13 単数用法のThey​

第49回 Quality Review Issue No. 12  study, investigation, research の微妙なニュアンスのちがい

第50回 SinceとBecause 用法に違いはあるのか?

第51回 Figure 1とFig.1の使い分け

第52回 数式を含む場合は現在形か?過去形か?

第53回 Quality Review Issue No. 8  By 2020とup to 2020の違い

第54回 Quality Review Issue No. 7  high-accuracy data? それとも High accurate data? 複合形容詞でのハイフンの使用

第55回 実験計画について

第56回 参考文献について

第57回 データの分析について

第58回 強調表現について

第59回 共同研究の論文執筆について

第60回 論文の略語について

第61回 冠詞の使い分けについて

第62回 大文字表記について

第63回 ダッシュの使い分け

第64回 英語の言葉選びの難しさについて

第65回 過去形と能動態について

第66回 「知識の呪い」について

第67回 「文献の引用パート1」について

第68回 「文献の引用パート2」について

第69回 「ジャーナル用の図表の準備」について

第70回 「結論を出す ~AbstractとConclusionsの違い~」について

第71回 「研究倫理 パート1: 研究デザインとデータ報告」について

第72回 「研究倫理 パート2: 読者の時間を無駄にしない」について

第73回 「記号と特殊文字の入力」について

第74回 「Liner regression(線形回帰)は慎重に」について

第75回 「Plagiarism(剽窃)を避ける」について


〒300-1206
茨城県牛久市ひたち野西3-12-2
オリオンピアA-5

TEL 029-870-3307
FAX 029-870-3308
ワールド翻訳サービス スタッフブログ ワールド翻訳サービス Facebook ワールド翻訳サービスの動画紹介