Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36284070›Full record

ArticleIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2022

Inquiry in psychology.

Maria Virginia Machado Dazzani, Waldomiro José Silva-Filho

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Maria Virginia Machado DazzaniInstitute of Psychology, Federal University of Bahia (Brazil), Rua Prof. Aristides Novis 197, Federação, 40210-630, Salvador-Bahia, Brazil. vdazzani@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5303-3576
Waldomiro José Silva-FilhoUFBA, CNPq, Salvador-Bahia, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0874-9599

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 311816/2019-3Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico 435602/2018-7Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88887.568332/2020-00Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior 88887.568338/2020-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When they discuss the Danish academic situation, Szulevicz, Lund and Lund (2021) address three questions about the academic training of psychology researchers: (a) why do Danish master's students in psychology more frequently choose the qualitative method for their research?; (b) what are psychology students working on?; and (c) what are they interested in? These three questions have led us to reflect on researcher training and the political and educational model universities adopt for psychology master's courses, not only in the Danish context, but also in other general contexts. In this commentary, we will discuss one strictly normative issue: what should the scientific ideal be for training researchers in psychology? Or more accurately: how can psychology contribute to discussions about the scientific ideal of researcher training in this knowledge area?

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchEducation, GraduatePsychologyStudents, Health OccupationsDenmarkHumansModels, EducationalPoliticsPsychology, EducationalUniversitiesHigher educationInquiryMethodologyPeircean semioticPsychology

Identifiers

PMID36284070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.