Research Methods

When I read a post today about a PhD student who was kidnapped and murdered while conducting fieldwork, I was deeply shaken. It brought back memories of my own fieldwork experience during my PhD, when I was sexually harassed. No one had prepared me for how to handle such situations. In anthropology—still a male-dominated field—fieldwork is often romanticized as an adventure, as if being able to "handle anything" is a measure of competence. This mindset leaves many researchers, especially women and young students, feeling isolated when they face dangers in the field. When I was harassed, I didn’t tell my supervisors because I thought I was “overdoing it”. I took my own precautions and carried on with the fieldwork. Later, while writing my dissertation, I came across a handful of articles about female researchers who had experienced similar or even worse situations. I decided to include my experience in my dissertation. The response from my supervisors? “Oh, I didn’t know—you should’ve told me." Followed by: “Are you sure you want to write about this?" Yes, I was sure. And I still am. Since then, I have delivered workshops for young researchers to help them recognize that if something feels off, then IT IS off. No research is worth your safety. No academic expectation should silence your voice. I remain committed to advocating for women's and students’ rights, ensuring that no one has to navigate these situations alone. It’s time we talk openly about the risks of fieldwork and change how we prepare the next generation of researchers. Have you or someone you know faced similar challenges? Let’s keep this conversation going. #WomenInResearch #FieldworkSafety #AcademicResponsibility #PhD #GBV

Participatory research is increasingly recognised as a way to produce more inclusive and policy-relevant evidence. In the last few days, I came across a very interesting resource, the 𝘠𝘖𝘜-𝘊𝘈𝘙𝘌: 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩-𝘓𝘦𝘥 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘈𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘙𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 (𝘠𝘗𝘈𝘙) 𝘛𝘰𝘰𝘭𝘬𝘪𝘵, offering a practical framework for engaging young people as active researchers on topics that affect their lives, including eco-anxiety. The toolkit was developed within the 𝘠𝘖𝘜-𝘊𝘈𝘙𝘌: 𝘠𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘊𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘈𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘙𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩 𝘰𝘯 𝘌𝘤𝘰-𝘢𝘯𝘹𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘺 project, funded under the Erasmus+ programme and bringing together partners from several EU Member States to support young people in contributing to decision-making processes. The toolkit offers accessible frameworks and methods to co-design and co-implement participatory research with young people. While participatory action research can foster agency, inclusion, and collective action across communities, supporting and expanding youth-led initiatives is essential, especially where youth voices are marginalized. 🔗 https://lnkd.in/eYV9dh8X #ParticipatoryResearch #Youth

Every year, I try to get out to the field to get back in touch with that elusive concept in development discourse, the "reality"! This year, I visited our carbon pilot in Tanzania and planted my first "carbon trees" in a new intensive agroforestry system we're rolling out One Acre Fund. It was also great to be back in Iringa where I first interviewed 11 years ago and have visited across roles with WFP and Mercy Corps. It's a beautiful part of the world. As always, I learnt a lot. Some highlights: 1. Intensive agroforestry systems are popular with farmers once fully understood, but adoption issues remain. The planting systems are new, as is the concept of using trees for soil health (rather than timber), and, therefore, require deep training in the field. The farmer I met (Paulo; no picture because we hold a strict consent standard) mentioned that he wasn't familiar with planting trees in the middle of the field or in a regimented boundary system to support soil health, but he was willing to give it a go! 2. 1AF's new carbon officers (Salome in the pics) generally spend at least 1-2 days enrolling and 1-2 days supporting planting with each farmer on her patch. The extension work is laborious and time-consuming, with a 50/50 split of data collection time and planting support with farmers. 3. This hand-holding on-farm is really important. Salome and her supervisor Valentino meticulously spotted mistakes when planting (e.g., planting trees next to older, more mature trees or odd placement of boundaries). Staff training to make real-time technical adjustments in the field is key. 4. Huge distances and subpar infrastructure lead to many efficiency issues. We walked the last 30 mins to the farm due to no road access (after a 45 min drive on unpaved roads). The mobile network was non-existent. This decreases the field officer-to-farmer and supervisor ratios we can deploy and there is no digital silver bullet (we use digital enrolment with offline capabilities but it failed to sync - hence the "find a rock to stand on" technique to find network!). 5. Planting trees isn't easy! I gave it a go, and after digging 15 pits in thick clay-based soil, I had a few blisters and felt pretty tired. Maybe I'm getting soft ;), but the serious point is it took a team of 4 to plant approx 75 trees in half a day. This work is very laborious, and farmers often need to bring in outside labour. 6. Climate change is already impacting tree seedling survival rates. A few weeks ago, there was one day of rain, so the farmers and our staff deployed many seedlings in preparation for planting, expecting that it was the beginning of over a month of consistent rains. However, a two-week dry spell followed, leading to the immediate loss of 1,000s of seedlings. 7. All of the above is why this work is costly and takes time. Carbon prices need to be priced accordingly, and investors/donors should give us as much rope as possible. #Agroforestry #Carbon

The best book on creativity I've ever read is 48 pages long, was written in 1939 by an ad man who left school in 6th grade, and takes about 30 minutes to read. Here's his entire method: The book is "A Technique for Producing Ideas" by James Webb Young. Young wasn't an academic...he was a copywriter at J. Walter Thompson who created one of the most controversial ads in history (a 1919 deodorant ad so blunt that 200 women cancelled their magazine subscriptions and female copywriters told him he'd insulted every woman in America. Sales went up 112%.) Here's the method: Step 1: Gather raw material (both specific and general). Young says the quality of your ideas is directly tied to the quantity and diversity of what you feed your brain. * Specific material is research about the actual problem. * General material is everything else: history, psychology, random conversations, unrelated industries. The more pieces you have, the more combinations are possible. Step 2: Mentally chew the material. Take the facts and turn them over. Look at them from different angles. Try fitting pieces together like a puzzle. Young says most people quit here because it's uncomfortable...you're holding a bunch of disconnected information and nothing clicks yet. That discomfort is the process working, not failing. Step 3: Drop it completely. Stop thinking about the problem. Go for a walk. Watch a movie. Sleep. Your subconscious is still connecting the pieces even when your conscious mind has moved on. Step 4: The idea shows up on its own. Young says it'll come to you "while shaving, or bathing, or most often when you are half awake in the morning." This only works if you did steps 1-3 honestly. If you skipped the research or rushed the chewing, nothing shows up in the shower. Step 5: Test it against reality. Take your idea to other people. Let them poke holes in it. Young says most people are so attached to the flash of insight from step 4 that they skip this entirely, and the idea dies on contact with the real world. Good ideas survive criticism, but great ideas get better from it. The underlying principle is simple: An idea is nothing more than a new combination of existing elements. You can't combine things you haven't collected, and you can't connect dots you've never seen.

Designing effective surveys is not just about asking questions. It is about understanding how people think, remember, decide, and respond. Cognitive science offers powerful models that help researchers structure surveys in ways that align with mental processes. The foundational work by Tourangeau and colleagues provides a four-stage model of the survey response process: comprehension, retrieval, judgment, and response selection. Each step introduces potential for cognitive error, especially when questions are ambiguous or memory is taxed. The CASM model -Cognitive Aspects of Survey Methodology- builds on this by treating survey responses as cognitive tasks. It incorporates working memory limits, motivational factors, and heuristics, emphasizing that poorly designed surveys increase error due to cognitive overload. Designers must recognize that the brain is a limited system and build accordingly Dual-process theory adds another important layer. People shift between fast, automatic responses (System 1) and slower, more effortful reasoning (System 2). Whether a user relies on one or the other depends heavily on question complexity, scale design, and contextual framing. Higher cognitive load often pushes users into heuristic-driven responses, undermining validity. The Elaboration Likelihood Model explains how people process survey content: either centrally (focused on argument quality) or peripherally (relying on surface cues). Users may answer based on the wording of the question, the branding of the survey, or even the visual aesthetics rather than the actual content unless design intentionally promotes central processing. Cognitive Load Theory offers tools for managing effort during survey completion. It distinguishes intrinsic load (task difficulty), extraneous load (poor design), and germane load (productive effort). Reducing the unnecessary load enhances both data quality and engagement. Attention models and eye-tracking reveal how layout and visual hierarchy shape where users focus or disengage. Surveys must guide attention without overwhelming it. Similarly, the models of satisficing vs. optimizing explain when people give thoughtful responses and when they default to good-enough answers because of fatigue, time pressure, or poor UX. Satisficing increases sharply in long, cognitively demanding surveys. The heuristics and biases framework from cognitive psychology rounds out this picture. Respondents fall prey to anchoring effects, recency bias, confirmation bias, and more. These are not user errors, but expected outcomes of how cognition operates. Addressing them through randomized response order and balanced framing reduces systematic error. Finally, modeling approaches like like cognitive interviewing, drift diffusion models, and item response theory allow researchers to identify hesitation points, weak items, and response biases. These tools refine and validate surveys far beyond surface-level fixes.

Participatory Research Toolkit: Empowering Communities to Measure Social Norms (#2, Research) This toolkit is a very rich resource for practitioners. Developed by #UNFPA and #UNICEF, provides invaluable resources to achieve this. It marks the culmination of SBC research conduct over many years. Why Participatory Methods? Participatory research methods empower participants by engaging them in discussions about complex and sensitive topics. This toolkit brings together nine participatory tools, offering practical guidance and examples to qualitatively measure social norms. Key Tools and Their Uses: Body Mapping: Visual aids help assess knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors concerning the body and mind. This method is particularly useful for understanding experiences related to physical and psychosocial factors. Cannot Do, Will Not Do, Should Not Do: Categorizes behaviors to reveal the reasons behind restrictions. This helps in identifying structural barriers, personal norms, and social norms. Complete-the-Story: Uses vignettes to allow participants to indirectly express their attitudes and intentions. This method is effective for discussing sensitive topics without asking participants to directly disclose their experiences. Free Listing: Participants list terms and concepts related to a given prompt, revealing how they conceptualize specific domains. This method is useful for formative research and understanding attitudes and norms. Gender Boxes and Gender Jumble: These tools measure gender norms and examine how gender impacts attitudes and behaviors. They are essential for research focused on the existence and influence of gender norms. Lifeline: Identifies normative cultural practices and provides a timeline of key life events. This tool is useful for research using a life-course perspective. Social Network Mapping: Visually represents reference groups across different levels of the social ecological model. This tool helps understand communication flow and social support within networks. 2x2 Tables for Social Norms: Measures the components of social norms (injunctive and descriptive norms, behavioral expectations, attitudes, and social rewards and sanctions) to understand norms on a deeper level. Real-World Applications: What is great about this toolkit is that provides examples of the tools have been used: .g. how Body Mapping was used to understand the physical and psychosocial risks of FGM in Ethiopia. This comprehensive guide shows that by leveraging these participatory methods, we can design more effective, culturally relevant programs that foster positive social change. My congratulations to the authors for pulling this incredibly useful set of tools together. Imagine using a tool called “Gender Jumble”. I can’t wait! #SocialNorms #ParticipatoryResearch #CommunityEngagement #BehaviorChange #ProgramDesign #UNFPA #UNICEF #TransformNorms Naveera Amjad Cäcilia Riederer

Your research findings are useless if they don't drive decisions. After watching countless brilliant insights disappear into the void, I developed 5 practical templates I use to transform research into action: 1. Decision-Driven Journey Map Standard journey maps look nice but often collect dust. My Decision-Driven Journey Map directly connects user pain points to specific product decisions with clear ownership. Key components: - User journey stages with actions - Pain points with severity ratings (1-5) - Required product decisions for each pain - Decision owner assignment - Implementation timeline This structure creates immediate accountability and turns abstract user problems into concrete action items. 2. Stakeholder Belief Audit Workshop Many product decisions happen based on untested assumptions. This workshop template helps you document and systematically test stakeholder beliefs about users. The four-step process: - Document stakeholder beliefs + confidence level - Prioritize which beliefs to test (impact vs. confidence) - Select appropriate testing methods - Create an action plan with owners and timelines When stakeholders participate in this process, they're far more likely to act on the results. 3. Insight-Action Workshop Guide Research without decisions is just expensive trivia. This workshop template provides a structured 90-minute framework to turn insights into product decisions. Workshop flow: - Research recap (15min) - Insight mapping (15min) - Decision matrix (15min) - Action planning (30min) - Wrap-up and commitments (15min) The decision matrix helps prioritize actions based on user value and implementation effort, ensuring resources are allocated effectively. 4. Five-Minute Video Insights Stakeholders rarely read full research reports. These bite-sized video templates drive decisions better than documents by making insights impossible to ignore. Video structure: - 30 sec: Key finding - 3 min: Supporting user clips - 1 min: Implications - 30 sec: Recommended next steps Pro tip: Create a library of these videos organized by product area for easy reference during planning sessions. 5. Progressive Disclosure Testing Protocol Standard usability testing tries to cover too much. This protocol focuses on how users process information over time to reveal deeper UX issues. Testing phases: - First 5-second impression - Initial scanning behavior - First meaningful action - Information discovery pattern - Task completion approach This approach reveals how users actually build mental models of your product, leading to more impactful interface decisions. Stop letting your hard-earned research insights collect dust. I’m dropping the first 3 templates below, & I’d love to hear which decision-making hurdle is currently blocking your research from making an impact! (The data in the templates is just an example, let me know in the comments or message me if you’d like the blank versions).

What do Albert Einstein, Paul McCartney, and Virgina Woolf have in common – besides being highly influential figures in their respective fields? All three revealed that some of their most creative ideas came to them whilst they were walking or sleeping. Ok, so what’s the brain up to this time? Why should disengaging help #creativity? In 2014, a group of researchers at Stanford measured the positive effects of mild physical activity on creativity – and found that walking boosted creativity by between 50-80%. 👉 When students took a brisk walk around the college campus or walked at a relaxed pace on an indoor treadmill facing a blank wall – their performance on a test of creativity called the “Alternate Uses Task” improved by a whopping 81%! The AUT tests “divergent thinking,” which is the ability to explore many possible solutions, including blue sky or out of the box thinking. 👉 Walking outdoors produced the most novel and highest quality analogies, indicating that walking had a very specific benefit in improving creativity. 👉 Furthermore, walking made people more talkative, resulting in roughly 50% more total ideas being produced compared to when sitting. In other words, just going for a short walk led to a massive increase in creativity. Or, in the words of the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, "All truly great thoughts are conceived by walking.” Sleeping on it seems to have a similar creativity-enhancing effect as physical exercise. How many times have you come back to tackle a seemingly insurmountable problem after a sleep – or even a nap – and the pieces seemed to fall right into place? Studies have found that during the phase of sleep known as Rapid Eye Movement (REM) sleep, the #brain is able to make new and novel connections between unrelated ideas, which is a key aspect of creativity. This state of sleep allows for the free association of ideas, which can lead to creative problem-solving and the generation of innovative ideas upon waking. REM sleep is thought to contribute to "incubating" creative ideas, as the brain reorganizes and consolidates memories, potentially leading to creative insights. Both physical exercise and sleep are mood-enhancers, which may contribute to enhancing creativity. Research suggests that positive moods can enhance creative thinking, making it easier for individuals to think flexibly and come up with innovative solutions. Positive emotional states often increase cognitive flexibility, broaden attention, and allow for more associations between ideas, which are key elements of creativity. Turns out, there are practical ways to spark more ‘Aha!’ moments in our lives. The next time you’re struggling to think of a solution to a problem, try taking a walk or sleeping on it – the evidence-backed cheat-codes for unlocking creativity!

Did you know that in the UK, women are 50% more likely to be misdiagnosed after a heart attack? This is not because women’s symptoms are “atypical”, they are typical for women, but because medical research and training have historically centred on male bodies. The “Reference Man” has been the standard for everything from drug dosages to car crash test dummies, with devastating results: women are 17% more likely to die in a car crash, and 47% more likely to be seriously injured, simply because safety systems were not designed with them in mind. Caroline Criado Perez outlines this concept of 'male as default' in her book, Invisible Women: Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. Even today, the vast majority of pain studies are conducted on male mice, and drugs are often not tested on women at different stages of their menstrual cycle. The result? Women experience more adverse drug reactions, and sometimes, the drugs simply don’t work for them. This isn’t just a healthcare issue, it’s a design issue. When we build systems, products, or workplaces around a single “default” user, we inevitably exclude others. The cost is not just inconvenience, but real harm. In the case of organisations outside of healthcare, these same default user error easily occurs. And this is causing real harm to individuals, teams, companies and has real knock-on effects in society. So what can we do? We must design workplace systems, policies, and cultures that recognise and accommodate difference. We must examine inherent bias that exists in our people processes - right from designing a role, through to the language used in job descriptions and the expectations around what a job 'should' look like. There are so many aspects to eliminating bias in the workplace and this is just one of the starting points for organisations. At Shape Talent Ltd, we've developed a Debias Audit, designed to identify barriers and gender biases in organisations, many of which can be subtle and unintentional. People processes, policies and systems may have been passed down for years without anyone looking critically at them and asking whether they are gender inclusive in their ability to attract, retain, promote and reward talent. Organisations may not be aware of the simple, subtle and often quick changes they can make to their HR policies and practices that positively influence gender equality in the workforce. If this might be a helpful tool, get in touch to discuss how we can customise it for your organisation. #GenderEquity #EDI #DebiasAudit #DEI #PeopleAndCulture #HRLeadership #HRToolkit

🤯 What if you could simulate how your entire workforce would react to a change BEFORE implementing it? New research shows we're closer than you think - generative AI powered "behavioral digital twins" can predict human responses with 85% accuracy using just a 2-hour interview. This takes the digital twin concept into the realm of human behavior and decision-making - instead of replicating a machine or process, it creates virtual models of real people based on in-depth qualitative data.  They found:  -interview-based simulations outperform those using just demographic data -significantly reduced bias across race and gender -replicated behavior across social attitudes, personality traits, and decision-making scenarios What does this mean for the world of work? Because behavioral digital twins can accurately simulate individual attitudes, personality traits, and decision-making patterns, organizations can revolutionize how they understand, engage with, and support their people - from predicting responses to new initiatives to creating more personalized experiences throughout the employee journey. Imagine being able to: -test policies before rolling them out company-wide -see how job ads will resonate with different candidate groups -predict candidate success and cultural fit -design better interview questions and hiring processes -create more inclusive job descriptions -personalize candidate experience -optimize onboarding programs -spot potential retention risks early -create better-matched teams -design more appealing benefits packages -improve DEI initiatives -test workplace flexibility options -fine-tune your EVP   I'm still digesting this study, but it's exciting that using interview-based data (vs. demographics alone) can be used to simulate human responses and significantly reduce bias across groups which is critical for building more equitable workplaces. Of course, behavioral digital twins won't replace human judgment, but it certainly opens exciting possibilities for smarter, more informed, and more inclusive human resources and workplace decisions. https://lnkd.in/ene6p2RN #GenAI #digitaltwins