In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By ‘novice’ we mean Master’s students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. This second article addresses FAQs about context, research questions and designs. Qualitative research takes into account the natural contexts in which individuals or groups function to provide an in-depth understanding of real-world problems. The research questions are generally broad and open to unexpected findings. The choice of a qualitative design primarily depends on the nature of the research problem, the research question(s) and the scientific knowledge one seeks. Ethnography, phenomenology and grounded theory are considered to represent the ‘big three’ qualitative approaches. Theory guides the researcher through the research process by providing a ‘lens’ to look at the phenomenon under study. Since qualitative researchers and the participants of their studies interact in a social process, researchers influence the research process. The first article described the key features of qualitative research, the third article will focus on sampling, data collection and analysis, while the last article focuses on trustworthiness and publishing.
To elucidate how authoritative knowledge is established for better dealing with unstructured urban problems, this article describes how collaborations between researchers and officials become an instrument for conceptualizing and addressing policy problems. A case study is used to describe a research consortium evaluating the controversial practice of ‘Lifestyle’ based housing allocation in the Dutch domain of social-housing. Analyzing this case in key episodes, we see researchers and policymakers selectively draw on established institutional practices—their so called ‘home practices’—to jointly (re-)structure problems. In addition, we find that restructuring problems is not only intertwined with, but also deliberately aimed at (re-)structuring the relations within and between the governmental practices, the actors are embedded in. It is by selectively tinkering with knowledges, values, norms, and criteria that the actors can deliberately enable and constrain the ways a real-world problem is addressed.
This overview can be regarded as an atlas or travel guide with which the reader can follow a route along the various professorships. Chapter 2 centres on the professorships that are active in the field of Service Economy. Chapter 3 is dedicated to the professorships that are focussed on the field of Vital Region. Chapter 4 describes the professorships operating in the field of Smart Sustainable Industries. Chapter 5 deals with the professorships that are active in the field of the institution-wide themes of Design Based Education and Design Based Research. Lastly, in Chapter 6 we make an attempt to discover one or more connecting themes or procedures in the approach of the various professorships. This publication is not intended to give a definitive answer to the question as to what exactly NHL Stenden means by the concept of Design Based Research. The aim of this publication is to get an idea of everything that is happening in the NHL Stenden professorships and to pique one’s curiosity to find out more.
‘Dieren in de dijk’ aims to address the issue of animal burrows in earthen levees, which compromise the integrity of flood protection systems in low-lying areas. Earthen levees attract animals that dig tunnels and cause damages, yet there is limited scientific knowledge on the extent of the problem and effective approaches to mitigate the risk. Recent experimental research has demonstrated the severe impact of animal burrows on levee safety, raising concerns among levee management authorities. The consortium's ambition is to provide levee managers with validated action perspectives for managing animal burrows, transitioning from a reactive to a proactive risk-based management approach. The objectives of the project include improving failure probability estimation in levee sections with animal burrows and enhancing risk mitigation capacity. This involves understanding animal behavior and failure processes, reviewing existing and testing new deterrence, detection, and monitoring approaches, and offering action perspectives for levee managers. Results will be integrated into an open-access wiki-platform for guidance of professionals and in education of the next generation. The project's methodology involves focus groups to review the state-of-the-art and set the scene for subsequent steps, fact-finding fieldwork to develop and evaluate risk reduction measures, modeling failure processes, and processing diverse quantitative and qualitative data. Progress workshops and collaboration with stakeholders will ensure relevant and supported solutions. By addressing the knowledge gaps and providing practical guidance, the project aims to enable levee managers to effectively manage animal burrows in levees, both during routine maintenance and high-water emergencies. With the increasing frequency of high river discharges and storm surges due to climate change, early detection and repair of animal burrows become even more crucial. The project's outcomes will contribute to a long-term vision of proactive risk-based management for levees, safeguarding the Netherlands and Belgium against flood risks.
In recent years, frequent earthquakes have been reported in the Groningen region due to gas extraction. The building stock of the region mainly consists of brick masonry structures which were built without any seismic design taken into consideration. Therefore, these structures are extremely vulnerable to the loads coming from the earthquakes hitting the Groningen area on a regular basis. Numerous damage claims for damages on structures arise after every earthquake. In order to protect and reassure the structural integrity of the numerous brick masonry structures (more than 14.000 lay in the seismic zone), innovative solutions need to be developed. One of the approaches is to strengthen these houses extensively, up to a level that earthquake forces do not affect the original structure. This approach results in heavy and most of the times ugly strengthening solutions. A promising technology seems to be the installation of a vibration isolating concrete at the foundation level in order to decrease the vibration demands to the structures during the earthquake events. This latter method has been developed by the partner of this project, Nederboom, and will be investigated further for its advantages over the conventional techniques in terms of efficacy, applicability and cost. The aim of the proposed project is to carry out an experimental campaign to provide the essential experimental background to introduce and validate the effectiveness of this technology when repeated earthquake loads are applied several times on a brick masonry structural component. The experiments will be performed at the testing facilities of BuildinG, partner of the project, and will be supervised by members of the Earthquake Research Group of Hanze University of Applied Sciences.
![Prevalence of responsible research practices among academics in The Netherlands [version 2; peer review: 2 approved]](https://publinova-harvester-content-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbnails/files/previews/pdf/20240419024525240089.f5_0352_4033_99e3_b9d3476cb04f_110664_gowri_gopalakrishn-thumbnail-400x300.png)
