Developing a Collaborative Agenda for Humanities and Social Scientific Research on Laboratory Animal Science and Welfare

Davies et al. (2016) full text summary PDF

For which topic were research priorities identified?

laboratory animal science and welfare

In which location was the research priority setting conducted?

Europe - United Kingdom

Why was it conducted at all?

Improving laboratory animal science and welfare requires both new scientific research and insights from research in the humanities and social sciences. Whilst scientific research pro vides evidence to replace, reduce and refine procedures involving laboratory animals (the ‘3Rs'), work in the humanities and social sciences can help understand the social, economic and cultural processes that enhance or impede humane ways of knowing and working with laboratory animals. However, communication across these disciplinary perspectives is currently limited, and they design research programmes, generate results, engage users, and seek to influence policy in different ways.

What was the objective?

to identify areas where scientists and other stakeholders agree that innovative interdisciplinary approaches could be most productively applied

What was the outcome?

a list of 30 research questions

How long did the research prioritization take?

No information provided.

Which methods were used to identify research priorities?

survey; workshop

How were the priorities for research identified exactly?

Step 1: collecting research questions: before workshop each participant was encouraged to consult colleagues and peers in generating initial list of questions, questions were emailed to workshop organizers. Step 2: data processing: data cleaning, resulting in list of 135 questions. Step 3: survey: initial round of voting on research questions. Step 4: workshop: small group discussions and plenary sessions: clarification of issues and redefinition of questions, discussion of prioritization. Step 5: final editing and grouping of questions over email

Which stakeholders took part?

45 life scientists, social scientists, humanities scholars, non-governmental organizations, policy-makers.

How were stakeholders recruited?

Participants were recruited through purposeful or theoretical sampling. The overall process involved 45 participants, with 35 attending the workshop, and incorporated a range of expertise from the humanities, social sciences, biological research, animal welfare science, science policy-makers, animal advocacy groups and other stakeholders.

Were stakeholders actively involved or did they just participate?

Stakeholders were mere participants of the research prioritization process; they were not actively involved in the process.