Show simple item record

Resistance to Research and Research Utilization: The Death and Life of a Feedback Attempt

dc.contributor.authorChesler, Mark A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorFlanders, Maryen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-13T18:39:47Z
dc.date.available2010-04-13T18:39:47Z
dc.date.issued1967en_US
dc.identifier.citationChesler, Mark; Flanders, Mary (1967). "Resistance to Research and Research Utilization: The Death and Life of a Feedback Attempt." The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 3(4): 469-487. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/66593>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0021-8863en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/66593
dc.description.abstractSome of the problems scientists encounter in making their feedback of research findings relevant and useful to educational practitioners are explored in this paper. Feedback of research findings is considered as the transmission-reception link in the research utilization chain. Two sessions of scientist-practitioner collaboration are described: one in which their interaction was unproductive and alienative, and one in which major progress was made in the direction of scientist clarity and utility and practitioner trust and acceptance. Drawing from the events of these two sessions, a conceptualization of the feedback process is made, with force fields representing the dilemmas facing practitioners in their postures toward scientists and scientific resources, and vice versa. A series of suggested "rules of the game" includes attention to the client's preparation and contract formation, the establishment of trust, the demonstration of valued resources, and the facilitation of client autonomy.aen_US
dc.format.extent3108 bytes
dc.format.extent1782690 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherSage Publicationsen_US
dc.titleResistance to Research and Research Utilization: The Death and Life of a Feedback Attempten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelManagementen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelPsychologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEconomicsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelBusinessen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumCenter for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, The University of Michigan.en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/66593/2/10.1177_002188636700300403.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/002188636700300403en_US
dc.identifier.sourceThe Journal of Applied Behavioral Scienceen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIn W. Bennis, K. Benne, & R. Chin (Eds.), The planning of change. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1961:en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGlidewell, J. The entry problem in consultation. Pp. 653-660.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGouldner, A. Engineering and clinical approaches to consulting. pp. 643-653.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceJenkins, D. Force field analysis applied to a school situation. Pp. 238-244.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLippitt, R. Value judgment problems of the social scientist in actionresearch. Pp. 689-698.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMann, F. Studying and creating change. Pp. 605-617.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.