			Home About us Contact

Problem Analysis (problem + analysis)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Law and Criminology	50%

Selected Abstracts

Problem Formulation and Option Assessment (PFOA) Linking Governance and Environmental Risk Assessment for Technologies: A Methodology for Problem Analysis of Nanotechnologies and Genetically Engineered Organisms

THE JOURNAL OF LAW, MEDICINE & ETHICS, Issue 4 2009
Kristen C. Nelson
Societal evaluation of new technologies, specifically nanotechnology and genetically engineered organisms (GEOs), challenges current practices of governance and science. Employing environmental risk assessment (ERA) for governance and oversight assumes we have a reasonable ability to understand consequences and predict adverse effects. However, traditional ERA has come under considerable criticism for its many shortcomings and current governance institutions have demonstrated limitations in transparency, public input, and capacity. Problem Formulation and Options Assessment (PFOA) is a methodology founded on three key concepts in risk assessment (science-based consideration, deliberation, and multi-criteria analysis) and three in governance (participation, transparency, and accountability). Developed through a series of international workshops, the PFOA process emphasizes engagement with stakeholders in iterative stages, from identification of the problem(s) through comparison of multiple technology solutions that could be used in the future with their relative benefits, harms, and risk. It provides "upstream public engagement" in a deliberation informed by science that identifies values for improved decision making. [source]

How instructional design experts use knowledge and experience to solve ill-structured problems

PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT QUARTERLY, Issue 1 2008
Peggy A. Ertmer
This study examined how instructional design (ID) experts used their prior knowledge and previous experiences to solve an ill-structured instructional design problem. Seven experienced designers used a think-aloud procedure to articulate their problem-solving processes while reading a case narrative. Results, presented in the form of four assertions, showed that experts (1) narrowed the problem space by identifying key design challenges, (2) used an amalgam of knowledge and experience to interpret the problem situation, (3) incorporated a mental model of the ID process in their problem analyses, and (4) came to similar conclusions about how to respond to the situation, despite differences in their initial conceptualizations. Implications for educating novice instructional designers are discussed. [source]

POLICY AND INTERVENTION CONSIDERATIONS OF A NETWORK ANALYSIS OF STREET GANGS,

CRIMINOLOGY AND PUBLIC POLICY, Issue 3 2005
JEAN MARIE MCGLOIN
Research Summary: This study details a network analysis of the street gang landscape in Newark, New Jersey. Using individual gang members as the unit of analysis and multiple layers of associations as the linkages within the networks, the results suggest that the gangs in Newark are loosely organized with pockets of cohesion. In addition, there is variation with regard to individual connectedness within the gangs, and certain gang members emerge as "cut-points" or the only connection among gang members or groups of gang members. Policy Implications: The results lend further credence to the notion that problem analysis should precede gang interventions. In particular, the findings suggest that particular groups of gang members may be amenable to the collective accountability tactic, whereas others may become more cohesive as a consequence. Indeed, an intervention focused on individuals may be more productive in Newark. The cut-points within gangs are particularly worthy of attention, both for their capacity to act as communication agents for a deterrence message and for their potential vulnerability to the pulling levers strategy. [source]

A Conceptual Definition and Theoretical Model of Public Deliberation in Small Face,to,Face Groups

COMMUNICATION THEORY, Issue 4 2002
Stephanie Burkhalter
Although scholars have begun to study face,to,face deliberation on public issues, "deliberation" has no clear conceptual definition and only weak moorings in larger theories. To address these problems, this essay integrates diverse philosophical and empirical works to define deliberation and place it in a broader theoretical context. Public deliberation is a combination of careful problem analysis and an egalitarian process in which participants have adequate speaking opportunities and engage in attentive listening or dialogue that bridges divergent ways of speaking and knowing. Placed in the meta,theoretical framework of structuration theory (Giddens, 1984), deliberation is theorized to exist at the center of a homeostatic loop, in which deliberative practice reinforces itself. A review of theory and research on the causes and effects of deliberation leads us to develop this structurational conceptualization into the self,reinforcing model of deliberation. This model posits that public deliberation is more likely to occur when discussion participants perceive potential common ground, believe deliberation is an appropriate mode of talk, possess requisite analytic and communication skills, and have sufficient motivation. Deliberation directly reinforces participants' deliberative habits and skills, and it indirectly promotes common ground and motivation by broadening participants' public identities and heightening their sense of political efficacy. [source]