Six personas to adopt when framing theoretical research questions in biology

被引:1
|
作者
Shaw, Allison K. [1 ]
Bisesi, Ave T. [1 ]
Wojan, Chris [1 ]
Kim, Dongmin [1 ]
Torstenson, Martha [1 ]
Lutz, Peter [1 ,2 ]
Ales, Ruby [1 ,3 ]
Shao, Cynthia [1 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Minnesota, Dept Ecol Evolut & Behav, St Paul, MN 55108 USA
[2] Univ Minnesota, Dept Comp Sci, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[3] Univ Minnesota, Dept Math, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
[4] Univ Minnesota, Dept Biochem, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
关键词
mathematical biology; methodology; narratives; pedagogy; scientific writing; theoretical ecology; POPULATIONS; COMPETITION; MIGRATION; EVOLUTION; ECOLOGY; SPREAD; MODELS;
D O I
10.1098/rspb.2024.0803
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Theory is a critical component of the biological research process, and complements observational and experimental approaches. However, most biologists receive little training on how to frame a theoretical question and, thus, how to evaluate when theory has successfully answered the research question. Here, we develop a guide with six verbal framings for theoretical models in biology. These correspond to different personas one might adopt as a theorist: 'Advocate', 'Explainer', 'Instigator', 'Mediator', 'Semantician' and 'Tinkerer'. These personas are drawn from combinations of two starting points (pattern or mechanism) and three foci (novelty, robustness or conflict). We illustrate each of these framings with examples of specific theoretical questions, by drawing on recent theoretical papers in the fields of ecology and evolutionary biology. We show how the same research topic can be approached from slightly different perspectives, using different framings. We show how clarifying a model's framing can debunk common misconceptions of theory: that simplifying assumptions are bad, more detail is always better, models show anything you want and modelling requires substantial maths knowledge. Finally, we provide a roadmap that researchers new to theoretical research can use to identify a framing to serve as a blueprint for their own theoretical research projects.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Student-Driven Research at the Mathematical and Theoretical Biology Institute
    Castillo-Chavez, Carlos
    Kribs, Christopher
    Morin, Benjamin
    AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL MONTHLY, 2017, 124 (09): : 876 - 892
  • [32] THE MATHEMATICAL AND THEORETICAL BIOLOGY INSTITUTE - A MODEL OF MENTORSHIP THROUGH RESEARCH
    Camacho, Erika T.
    Kribs-Zaleta, Christopher
    Wirkus, Stephen
    MATHEMATICAL BIOSCIENCES AND ENGINEERING, 2013, 10 (5-6) : 1351 - 1363
  • [33] WHEN TO ASK "WHY?": OBSERVATIONS ON THE DYNAMICS OF QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS IN A SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH
    Cresto, Eleonora
    ANALISIS FILOSOFICO, 2007, 27 (02): : 101 - 117
  • [34] Knowing When to Scale Back: Addressing Questions of Research Scope in the Field
    Newsome, Akasemi
    PS-POLITICAL SCIENCE & POLITICS, 2014, 47 (02) : 410 - 413
  • [35] QUESTIONS TO KEEP IN MIND WHEN READING NEW CONTRIBUTIONS TO QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
    Frank, Gelya
    OTJR-OCCUPATION PARTICIPATION AND HEALTH, 2010, 30 (02) : 50 - 50
  • [36] How the questions of prospective teachers evolve when linking research to practice
    Lauer, Sarah van Ingen
    Ariew, Susan
    TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION, 2022, 109
  • [37] THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL QUESTIONS OF STRUCTURE RHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH ON OINTMENTS .1.
    EROS, I
    PHARMAZIE, 1977, 32 (11): : 709 - 713
  • [38] Empirical and Theoretical Studies on Number Comparison: Design Parameters and Research Questions
    Ballan, Meltem
    SCIENTIFICA, 2012, 2012
  • [39] THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL QUESTIONS OF STRUCTURE RHEOLOGICAL RESEARCH ON OINTMENTS .2.
    EROS, E
    UGRIHUNYADVARI, E
    PHARMAZIE, 1977, 32 (11): : 713 - 716
  • [40] Naming and Framing: Six Principles for Embedding Health Equity Language in Policy Research, Writing, and Practice
    Kaalund, Kamaria
    Pearson, Jay A.
    Thoumi, Andrea
    MILBANK QUARTERLY, 2025,