Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35481684›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2022

Scaling up qualitative research to harness the capacity of lay people in invasive plant management.

Nicholas Gill, Laurie Chisholm, Jennifer Atchison, Sonia Graham, Gina Hawkes, Lesley Head, Shaun McKiernan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Scaling up qualitative research to harness the capacity of lay people in invasive plant management.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Nicholas GillSchool of Geography and Sustainable Communities, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7514-2837
Laurie ChisholmSchool of Earth, Atmospheric, and Life Sciences, Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0708-6535
Jennifer AtchisonSchool of Geography and Sustainable Communities, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1173-8943
Sonia GrahamSchool of Geography and Sustainable Communities, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-4195-4559
Gina HawkesSchool of Geography and Sustainable Communities, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0590-6480
Lesley HeadSchool of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Melbourne, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5114-7614
Shaun McKiernanSchool of Geography and Sustainable Communities, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Successful management of invasive plants (IPs) requires the active participation of diverse communities across land tenures. This can be challenging because communities do not always share the views of scientists and managers. They may directly disagree, have alternative views, or be unwilling to manage IPs. Reviews of IP social science identify opportunities to better understand the role of cultural processes and everyday practices to address these challenges. To scale up and leverage the insights of existing qualitative social science IP research, we used meta-ethnography to unlock accounts and interpretations of lay perspectives. Meta-ethnography is a form of qualitative research synthesis increasingly used beyond its origins in health and education to produce interpretive syntheses of an area of research. In the 7 phases of meta-ethnography, we systematically identified and synthesized 19 qualitative articles pertinent to lay experience and knowledge of IPs in diverse settings. Action and meaning regarding IPs were influenced by 6 meta-themes in personal and social life: dissonance, priorities, difference, agency, responsibility, and future orientations. Through descriptions and examples of each meta-theme, we demonstrated how the meta-themes are higher level structuring concepts across the qualitative research that we analyzed and we retained grounding in the in-depth qualitative research. We characterized the meta-themes as leverage points and tensions by which we reframed lay people in terms of capacity for reflective IP management rather than as obstacles. The meta-ethnography synthesis shows how leverage points and tensions emerge from everyday life and can frame alternative and meaningful starting points for both research and public engagement and deliberation regarding IP management. These insights are not a panacea, but open up new space for reflective and mutual consideration of how to effectively navigate often complex IP problems and address conservation and social and livelihood issues in dynamic social and physical environments.

Indexed as

Anthropology, CulturalConservation of Natural ResourcesHumansQualitative ResearchResearch Designciencias socialesenvironmental managementexperiencia comúngestión ambientalinvasive plantsinvestigación cualitativalay experiencemeta-ethnographymeta-etnografíaplantas invasorasqualitative researchreframingreplanteamientosocial science元民族志入侵植物定性研究环境管理社会科学重构非专业人士的经验

Identifiers

PMID35481684
PMCPMC10087763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.