Sentence examples for rejection of research from inspiring English sources

The combining of the interactor question and the manifestor-of-adaptation question (in the engineering sense) led to the rejection of research aimed at considering the role of species as interactors, simpliciter, in evolution.

In our view, the 3 to 6-month interval for REC meetings was too long as this may result in unnecessary delays in processing (approval or rejection) of research protocols.

As stated by a female key informant, " Research participants want to feel they are better off than they were before research was introduced to them".. Another male focus group participant reflected that community rejection of HIV research may result from a perception that this is just a " dry academic exercise".

The theories, models, and methods that were developed by anthropologists to study non-European worlds tended toward a rejection of historical research of any kind, at least within the limits of the discipline.

The low value of R allegedly caused the rejection of seven research hypotheses in this model for Indonesian students.

In order to accommodate the acceptance or rejection of those research hypotheses, experimental trials were planned aiming to gather driving performance data from a driving simulator and real traffic conditions through a specially equipped vehicle.

In order to accommodate the acceptance or rejection of the research hypotheses of the previous section for a semi-dynamic driving simulator, experimental trials were planned aiming to gather driving performance data from the drivers while driving in the driving simulator and on-the-road.

Again, we cannot draw a definitive conclusion but believe this may be a lost opportunity to proactively harness the strength of the scientific community in assessing and recommending rejection of unethical research.

Hence, the aggressive rejection of psychical research as the 'unscientific Other' of academic psychology, which James' opponents perceived as a threat to rationality and the scientific and social order, was a vital unifying principle aiding early psychologists to achieve something like a scientific identity (Leary, 1987).

They question whether the model captures important determinants like the rejection or acceptance of research by advocacy coalitions during policy development based on their core values and beliefs, the influence of institutional structures within policy networks and the perspective that researchers already make part of the policy makers domain and that the so called 'gap' does not exists.

Editors seem to identify a mixed understanding of their roles in research misconduct oversight but for the most part play a strong role in rejection of ethically suspect research and in notifying appropriate institutions.