Good points. Sticky issue. I have had many presentations that on the surface may look like almost the same one but in fact were subsequent ones that incorporated changes based on previous presentations and the feedback acquired. Eventually these have lead to a publication that incorporated the total feedback. For example (this could be boring--it's a CV listing of my and my colleague's entire presentations and publications just regarding misconceptions):
Kowalski, P., & Taylor, A. (2008). The effect of refuting misconceptions in the psychology classroom. Teaching of Psychology, under review (for well over a year!). (The point of this one is that there are changes/gains that can be demonstrated) Kowalski, P. , & Taylor, A. (2006, June). Use of Refutational Text and Lecture in Promoting Conceptual Change and Dispelling Misconceptions Across Disciplines. Workshop presented at The American Association for the Advancement of Science, Pacific Division’s Teaching Enhancement Workshop, San Diego, CA. (The point of this was to extend beyond psychology) Diaz, M., Bettwy, S., Taylor, A., & Kowalski, P. (2006, April). Mastery orientation, critical thinking and ability contribute to conceptual change. Poster presented at the 86th Annual Convention of the Western Psychological Association, Palm Springs, CA. (point of this one that students worked on was to related changes in misconceptions to wider areas of effects on student achievement) Taylor, A. & Kowalski, P. (2005, May). Efficacy of refutational presentation methods in dispelling psychological misconceptions, Poster presented at the 17th Annual American Psychological Society Convention, Los Angeles, CA. (first formal poster on using the refutational format but we were still not seeing it as conceptual change, in general) Kowalski, P., & Taylor A. (2004). Ability and critical thinking as predictors of change in students’ psychological misconceptions. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(4), 297-303. (early study in which we examined other learning factors as predictors of changes or gains in misinformed thinking) Taylor, A. (2004). Media influences on the formation of misconceptions about psychology. Greensboro, NC: Counseling and Student Services Clearinghouse. (ERIC CASS Document No. CG032741). (title says it all: looked at media influences in the formation of misinformation) Taylor, A., & Kowalski, P. (2004). Naïve Psychological Science: The Prevalence, Strength and Sources of Misconceptions. Psychological Record, 54, 15-25. (this one simply documented that these continue to be prominent and where they come from and how strongly held they are--the idea eventually led to looking at difficulty in conceptual change when the prior beliefs are strongly held) Kowalski, P., Taylor, A., Guggia, A., & Grande, M. (May 2003). Ability, cognitive engagement, instruction, and changes in students` psychological misconceptions. Poster presented at the 83rd Annual Convention of the Western Psychological Association, Vancouver, BC, Canada (this one was an earlier paper with an earlier version of the questionnaire and with a first look at instructional pedagogies as ways to reduce misconceptions and from there we went on to focus on refutational approaches) Taylor, A., & Kowalski, P. (June, 2002). Variables affecting reducing misconceptions in psychology. Poster presented at the Ninth Annual APS/STP Teaching Institute, at the 14th American Psychological Society Annual Convention, New Orleans, LA. (first ominbus look at lots of variables that we later refined down to critical thinking, motivations and learning strategies) Taylor, A., Kowalski, P., Negin, L., & Heise, R. (May, 2001). Sources of misinformation in psychology: Media, personal experience, and the classroom. Poster presented at the 81st Annual Convention of the Western Psychological Association, Maui, HI. (title says it all) Taylor, A., Kowalski, P., & Laggren, L. (April, 2000) Myths & Misconceptions about Psychology: Strength of Belief is not Related to Accuracy. Poster presented at the 80th Annual Convention, Western Psychological Association, Portland, OR. (first presentation when what caught our eye was that students believed more strongly in their misconceptions than in their correct conceptions) Each of these looked at some different aspect of the basic phenomenon and we have a ton of data. In addition every single year we refine, change, and update our data. Before we think we are ready to publish we wanted something "polished" but in the meantime want the feedback and want to provide our students who work on the project the opportunity to pull out a segment and work on it on their own, under our direction. Sometimes what they do seems superficially similar but is usually fundamentally unique. At which point is this wrong? It leads to a single publication every few years but lots of conference presentations. At our institution we are encouraged to have a "research program". At which point does it stop being a "program" and become a double-dip. Could someone replicate the same study year after year? After all, new data---double dip?? This is a muckier area than it would seem at first glance. Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---- Original message ---- >Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 09:30:24 -0400 >From: "Christopher D. Green" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: [tips] Double Dipping in Conference Papers :: Inside Higher Ed :: >Higher Education's Source for News, Views and Jobs >To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)" <[email protected]> > > Interesting item in today's Inside Higher Ed about > giving the same presentation at more than one > conference. > http://insidehighered.com/news/2008/05/20/double > > Chris Green > York U. > Toronto > > --- > To make changes to your subscription contact: > > Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
