Each journal has its own editorial office and each has different guidelines and instructions for the reviewing process. Some reviewers give much importance to the Practical Implications of the article, “Could the article be put into practice?”
My answer, smack to the point, is negative. Firstly, because ceratinly not "all" articles must have practical implications. This would mean denying the importance of either basic research, or reflection, or even speculation. (Heuristically, sometimes, speculation is a valuable scentific and philosophical way to be paved. The politically correct word for speculation is, if one wishes, "conjecture").
Secondly, one is to be cautious enough as to which journal one is sending what kind of papers. I did send a paper to a prestigious journal (where I have already published several other papers) and the editor kindly suggested that the paper be sent to different journal. This is oth a matter of convenience and strategy - on th side of the author(s) and the editor(s).
I do have the impression that science at large shows a magnificient vitality. Yet, most of the papers one sees in numerous journals and fields are - apologize for the expression - "minimalists", in te sense that they are technicaly correct, quite pertinent, practical, but with a (very) little philosophical spirit. By this I mean a heavy calibered reflection.
My answer, smack to the point, is negative. Firstly, because ceratinly not "all" articles must have practical implications. This would mean denying the importance of either basic research, or reflection, or even speculation. (Heuristically, sometimes, speculation is a valuable scentific and philosophical way to be paved. The politically correct word for speculation is, if one wishes, "conjecture").
Secondly, one is to be cautious enough as to which journal one is sending what kind of papers. I did send a paper to a prestigious journal (where I have already published several other papers) and the editor kindly suggested that the paper be sent to different journal. This is oth a matter of convenience and strategy - on th side of the author(s) and the editor(s).
I do have the impression that science at large shows a magnificient vitality. Yet, most of the papers one sees in numerous journals and fields are - apologize for the expression - "minimalists", in te sense that they are technicaly correct, quite pertinent, practical, but with a (very) little philosophical spirit. By this I mean a heavy calibered reflection.
If you take a sample of published scientific articles, you will see that many do not have direct practical implications, in this case defined from an economic point of view. All of course will depend what you mean with 'practical implications'. If culture/education development is an example of practical implications, I would be inclined you say perhaps yes.
Very nicely explained by Carlos, I agree.
So, not "all" papers must have practical implications, but I think those articles / papers dealing with policy matters can have practical implications; papers dealing with mere developing theory may need not to have practical implications.
Dear @Mahfuz, the general answer is NO! It depends on scientific field. Many of my research papers have practical applicability in the area of industrial automation, as many of my papers in control systems have no practical applications yet!
All the papers about "big bang", where shall here be practical applications? The comments above give hints, when practical spects are of interest.
In management and Accounting journals, you may find some of them put separate subtitles under the Abstract published: Purpose, Design/methodology, Findings, Practical implications, and Originality.
The coverage of scientific articles is as large as science itself….that would mean basic, fundamental, applied, practical… all should find a good balance and fair dealing in accepting, reviewing and publishing science. Having said that I personally believe that science aimed for problem solving must find priority. This is because in contemporary times we are faced with several challenges from survival to sustainability and therefore, science needs to play problem solver
There are different type of research.
If we speak about base research, what would be the applications?
For example: if I've done a papers based on the importance of Goethe in the German literature, what is its application? Or if I've done a paper based on the commutative algebra. Is it useful?
I think that if we abandon the base research, and we want to apply all the scientific research we don't have a very good research.
Definitely not. One should not undermine the value of fundamental (pure) research which gather knowledge for knowledge’s sake. The central aim of applied research is to discover a solution for some pressing practical problem, whereas basic research is directed towards finding information that has a broad base of applications and thus, adds to the already existing organized body of scientific knowledge.
Reviewers opinions depend on the scope of journal. Many journals accept only applied articles, but there are others which accept and value theoretical or basic research articles.
Dear Prof Mahfuz, perhaps in management and accounting, practical implications are most appropriate, and even needful. I'm saying perhaps because I'm not a management person like you or Prof Debi Saini. In some of my research, where I should be talking about Implications, I put them under "Conclusions and Implications", otherwise I may have simple "Conclusions".
I remember one incident related to “practical implication”. In early ’70 a researcher sent a paper on the analytical proof of “Four Color Conjecture”. The author was asked to resubmit the paper after including some practical applications of the conjecture. It was not resubmitted because an error in the proof was found
There is a big difference between Applied Research and Fundamental Research.
"Applied Research – Finding a solution for an immediate problem facing a society or an industry business organization. Eg.- research aimed at certain conclusions. Facing a concrete social or business problem is an example of applied research....
Fundamental Research – It is mainly concerned with generalization and with the formulation of theory. Eg- Gathering knowledge for knowledge’s sake. It is a research concerning some natural phenomenon or relating to pure mathematics. Also it is concerning human behavior carried on with a view to make generalisation of human behavior. Thus the central aim of applied research is to discover a solution for some practical problem, whereas fundamental research is finding information that has a broad base of applications and thus,adds to the already existing body of scientific knowledge".
For more details on this subject you may look at the following link>
http://www.academia.edu/4698585/Business_Research_Methods
If the paper aims to do solid literature or meta analysis, then not a must to cover the practical points, even will be better to do so.
It depends from the field. In applied science some papers' content could be put in application. In theoretical science, theories must be logically proved, discussed and accepted. If technology allows the experimentation of the theory , then may be the theory could be put in application, unless it could be added as scientific knowledge
Dear Prof Mahfouz the answer is no but it will be more useful to have it
No, not really, dear Mahfouz! Not as far as humanities is concerned!
No, Fundamental and applied research are both very important. The key differences between basic and applied research relate to both the purpose and the context in which it is undertaken.
In fundamental research articles, results are universal principles relating to the process and its relationship to outcomes.
In applied research article, one can say that results are solution to problem and that most of the times new knowledge is limited to problem.
In general, we have two notions of knowledge:
- Research as a “knowledge for knowledge’s sake”, which has helped to justify scholarly activity and universities. Academics should be allowed to conduct researches “for their own sake, regardless of commercial value”.
- Research for its “economic applications”. This type of research searches at finding a solution for a problem facing society or organization.
Of course, the results of a lot of the “Knowledge for knowledge’s sake” researches can have “economic applications” or value after some time.
No dear Mahfuz
However, in a undeveloped countries it is important to have an applied research so results can make a change. Most developed countries are more into basic research and theory.
Not really. That would contradict the very nature of research and generate a means-to-an-end approach. Of course, good ends justify good means, but the value of everything cannot not be quantified. There are countries that facilitate research mainly based on industry requirements and while that is quite understandable in their given context, there must also be an overarching acceptance of the fundamental crux of research-based work which is primarily deeper inquiry and understanding, borne of curiosity and passion. That is what drives the spirit of research.
No @Francesca,
you are totally wrong. You forget the most important motivation for research, human curiosity without another special aim.
In my opinion, all scientific papers should have either a practical or theoretical implications. This means that the paper should include a solution of a practical problem or allow the expansion of the theory in a particular scientific field.
When a scientific paper do not have any practical or theoretical implications, it is difficult to recognize the value of the paper from the scientific point of view.
Dear Jorge, really astonishing. Suddenly we have an additional aim, the theoretical impact. Thanks, we are going on.
Thank you, Prof. Mahfuz. I do not think that all published articles have practical implications. However, journals encourage the publication of articles whose theory can be conveyed to practice.
Kind regards,
Rashad
I think that some papers do not have practical implications. Theoretical papers are also important. Without avancement in theory we cannot do empirical or practical articles.
In addition to theoretical Implications and practical Implications, there are also ethical implications. Ethical implications refer to the assumed consequences of an ethical action.
“Ethics can be viewed as a subjective philosophy dealing with right and wrong or good and evil. Ethical implications of any activity are that the result be viewed with those ethical considerations in mind. But one must consider whether ethical considerations, like beauty, are in the eye of the beholder”.
For more information on ethical implication, you may refer to the following link:
http://www.ehow.com/info_8258896_ethical-implications.html
I do not think and it is not the case that every scientific result has an application at the moment. You all have put all possible reasons why, but I will say that all scientific knowledge as long as they are consistent and valid in principles of science will have applications in the future.
This thread particularly is of interest to mathematics perhaps for pure mathematics and its advancements deeper in to its frontiers of abstractions with no immediate applications in sight. But we believe that there will not be any mathematical structure, however abstract and complicated it might be that can not be used by humans in some future time - that is the case with applied mathematics, where people from outside fields find the importance and necessity of the theory they obtained from mathematics and borrow and make it fit to their applications.
Yes, they do. The only difference is that some are directly and tangibly of high practical relevance; and others have much less and remote practical implications. Eventually, even the most abstract scientific investigation does lead to some practical implications, as the scientific knowledge is used by some users for a clearer understanding of the nuances or utilizing that knowledge for some other purposes.
Some researchers, who are mainly interested in solving real world problems, conduct applied research. Other scientists, mainly those interested in evaluating theoretical problems, conduct basic research.
Even though basic and applied research are different to some extent, considerable overlap does exist. Some applied problems have some basic research undertones and it can be said that applied research represents a logical continuation of fundamental research.
I agree with the majority of participants in the discussion. Science breakthroughs rarely solves the problem of the near future. The results of this science in demand in the distant future. Often society (including journal Editors) are not prepared to accept the results of basic research scientists. Many critics consider the fundamental science that spending on basic research are not needed. The classic example is the ideas of Leonardo da Vinci, which were repeated after 400 years or more. I believe that this lack of understanding of scientific creativity manifested traits banal man who occupied that surrounds him at this specific moment. He does not think about the future. We can traditionally regret about it.
All research problems should be related to some observations or some previous theoretical findings. Previous findings are also selected following the similar criteria. Therefore all research problems should have practical implications. However, all research findings may not be suitable for immediate practical implementation. The issue could be irrelevant in research problems that concern with generalization or abstraction of a class of previously determined solutions. But I believe that these researches do have practical implications. Experts in the relevant field must be aware of them and therefore explicit mention is not necessary. We must remember “implication” and “implementation” are two different words with different meanings.
@ Dear Behrouz. I completely agree with you that, "Even though basic and applied research are different to some extent, considerable overlap does exist. Some applied problems have some basic research undertones and it can be said that applied research represents a logical continuation of fundamental research".
In fact, that what happens in may be most of the researches. The overlap between basic research and applied research exists.
While practical applications are immensely important, but a published research paper ought not necessarily have this characteristic. For example, one may prepare novel materials with no immediate applications but , in the long run, these materials come from the "shelf" and scientists find a wide range of applications for them.
Any idea for research interest is source of practical and real problem (in theory or in application); The solution could be even practical and/or theoretical. The solution could be applicable if it meets the experimental behavior needs and approved experimentally.
Dear colleagues and friends. In my opinion, one thing is to have a scientific paper with practical or theoretical implications for a fundamental or applied science and another different thing is to have a scientific paper without none of them. A scientific paper that expands the theoretical scope or the basis of a fundamental science is a scientific paper with practical implications. On the other hand, what is the purpose of writing a scientific paper without any implication for a science from the theoretical point of view or a practical application for the solution of a real problem. The impact and relevance of a scientific paper are precisely their application either for the expansion of a concrete scientific field of for the solution to a practical problem. What is the purpose of writing a scientific paper without any impact in any scientific field? For me none.
I believe researchers can conduct a research with both theoretical and practical implications. Can they?
I believe that there are few researchers who effectively combine theory and practice. Theoretical physics is a good example in this regard. On the other hand, there are inventors who avoid complicated formulas and theoretical analyzes.
I have seen in Social Sciences researches, the researchers combine both theoretical and practical implications.
In applied life science research implies both theory and application.
In many cases past research which has no apparent practical value is currently the practice/technology. Similarly, current research of minor or less practical applicability can be the future practice. Examples from my area are tremendous. Fourier analysis whereby signals are decomposed into the sum of basic signals were put hundreds of years ago but they form now the basis of all modern signal processing and communication technology. I don't agree that all research articles should always have immediate practical implications. This is unless the journal is specialized like a venue for solutions, inventions or so. Thanks. @Aldmour.
Dear Ismat,
I fully agree with you. In many cases past research which has no apparent practical value is currently the practice/technology. Similarly, current research of minor or less practical applicability can be the future practice. Nicely said.
Dear Carlos,
"One is to be cautious enough as to which journal one is sending what kind of papers. " Nicely said. It happened to many of our colleagues that after sending the article to a journal, they had received a letter from the editor advising them to send the article to some other journal.
I agree with Carlos. Scientific research is a group organized efforts carried out by the human using the scientific method and the rules of the scientific method to increase his control over the environment, and the discovery of its phenomena, and to determine the relationships between these phenomena. If that is the case, research work can be experimental, theoretical, or both.
Some journals in Social Sciences insist on having practical implications on all articles they publish. Suppose that an article does not have any practical implications. What the researcher can do in that case?
The majority of journals require that articles must have practical implications. This could mean denying the importance of all researches.
What would you do if your receive a comment from the reviewer that you must include the practical implications of your study, at the same time the study in your point of view has no practical implications.
I feel it is important to highlight the implications of the research. This can be both practice and academic. I put them under conclusion section. If there are no practice implications, then it may be useful to identfy the other implications to the academic community.
When Alexander Fleming discovered the world's first antibiotic "Penicillin" in September 1928, he published his discovery in 1929 in the British Journal of Experimental Pathology, but his paper was received with little attention. The practical application of his work waited until 1944 when mass production was started of this valuable drug. In 1945, he was awarded Noble's prize. What the story tells is that the practical application, of a certain knowledge, cannot necessarily be immediate or instant. In our daily life, we may underestimate someone now but we may realize his/her value after the elapse of time specially when there is much need for this person.
Dear Dr. Nizar. As you said that the practical application, of a certain knowledge, cannot necessarily be immediate or instant. In our daily life, we may underestimate someone now but we may realize his/her value after the elapse of time specially when there is much need for this person. Very nicely said,
Reading astronomical papers, I am always amazed at the extraordinary level of ingenuity deployed as apart from 67P at the moment, nothing can be "touched" and everything must be understood at distance which is challenged only by the fantastic absence of any practical application :-)
But knowing better the universe in which we live, though it does not necessarily feed us, isn't it the most magnificent practical application of Science ?
If we require the practical application in every scientific paper, then immediately restrict the range of scientific articles. Disappear theoretical articles in various fields of science that are important to justify the technological breakthroughs in the future. But that future may be very remote. Consequently, the article should be specific and skillfully decorated. These articles always find practical application. Even if such articles are purely theoretical.
Science is concerned with the advancement of knowledge, whether practical or not.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Composition Studies
- Articles