I would like to discuss this suggestion for editors of science journals (eg MDPI). It is about adding a "Practical application" or "Practical application of the results" section to the article structure, preferably right before or right after “Conclusions” section. In one of the reviews of our papers, the reviewer suggested adding such a section to show the practical implications of our research, as given for practicing professionals in the respective field of expertise. I believe that this is a very important suggestion. Not all research has practical, direct application, and is very often within the boundaries of basic examination, but it is advisable that the authors indicate (consider) areas for which the described results may be of practical importance. It does not have to be a commercial use, but a support for another area of science, for the benefit of society or community. You can say that there is an “Introduction” already, so why give another section? Unfortunately, a very common phenomenon in the Introduction section is to provide sources of applications without their verification, purely based on the luxuriant imagination of the authors of the reports being cited. A separate section on "practical applications/implications" will allow the application directions to be clearly marked and the authors to take responsibility for this part. Quoting other authors is a cover from this responsibility, but is also responsible for misconceptions growing within the scientific field and community. The introduction of such a section may be beneficial for both authors and publishers. It will increase the interest in the article and is more useful than the so-called research highlights. I am curious about your opinion on this matter.
The concept of the individual section of articles, that would be dedicated to discuss applications of a given research, is appealing. However, if the section would be mandatory, we can end up in the scenario when authors would copy-paste some general statements that bring no added value to the article. For that reason, I would suggest the section be voluntary. In the best-case scenario, some industry commentators may even provide brief statement feedback on the article. This additional section should be a base for vibrant discussion between the provider (authors of articles), and consumers (receivers/readers of the article ). Perhaps this additional section may be linked to the relevant forum in which readers may put their input. This way of communication may be used to quickly report any obstacles in independent replication of the relevant experiments.
We definitely need to find a way to make articles spreading in viral mode, and your idea goes in the right direction.
You have a good idea. It helps readers of academic papers to understand why and how the results would apply 'somewhere' . This is called generalization of results. First the results should be interpreted for the population studies, that is generalization. Next, inductively, you can think about further practical implications for the population and beyond to other populations.
FYI, beware of predatory journals, search Beall's list first!
Remember every study is based on the examined sample (usually) from a population... beyond the population is guess work. Practical implications could be from your experience with the subject matter and nothing wrong with citing similar findings (as long as you explain them).
Here are a few possibly relevant examples from different studies and journals,
Strang, K.D. (2021). Which organizational and individual factors predict success versus failure in procurement projects. International Journal of Information Technology Project Management, 12(3), 21-43. IGI
Strang, K.D., Che, F., & Vajjhala, N.R. (2021). Thematic analysis of agricultural government policy and operational problems. Agricultural Research Journal, (in-press) Springer
Strang, K.D. (2021). Symmetrical normalization of insecurity root causes and remedies in a developing country. International Journal of Agriculture Innovation, Technology and Globalisation, 1(4), Inderscience
Che, F.N., Strang, K.D., & Vajjhala, N.R. (2021). Using experiential learning to improve student attitude and learning quality in software engineering education. International Journal of Innovative Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 2(1), IGI
Publisher's Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Featured Application: Authors are encouraged to provide a concise description of the specific application or a potential application of the work. This section is not mandatory.
I think this is a great idea, since the instrumental / applicative value of scientific results is not always intuitively clear for the reader.
I also see this idea as a bridge between the so often split academics disciplines and "business best practice". To close these gap should be of highest importance, especially in our day and age where interdisciplinary research often is necessary to advance different fields of research.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Histology
- Sectioning