增强面向未来的系统性审查和范围界定审查的地平线扫描功能

IF 3 3区 管理学 Q1 ECONOMICS Futures Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.1016/j.futures.2024.103340
Eray Arda Akartuna , Shane D. Johnson , Amy Thornton
{"title":"增强面向未来的系统性审查和范围界定审查的地平线扫描功能","authors":"Eray Arda Akartuna ,&nbsp;Shane D. Johnson ,&nbsp;Amy Thornton","doi":"10.1016/j.futures.2024.103340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We propose modifications for scoping (and by extension systematic) review methodologies to improve their contribution to horizon scanning exercises. As a means of systematically collecting, coding and synthesising literature, we argue that scoping reviews are ideal for conducting initial environmental scans of a topic of interest, trend analyses and scenario developments. To demonstrate this utility, this paper uses a futures-oriented scoping review of technology-enhanced money laundering and terrorist financing risks as an example. At the forefront of the proposed modifications is a quality assessment framework assessing reviewed publications for their <em>neutrality, evidence, relevance</em> and <em>clarity</em> (NERC). This proposed framework is not only ideal for appraising publications but also as an indication of likelihood, namely whether their discussed insights constitute possible, plausible or probable alternative futures. The validity of the NERC framework in achieving these aims is assessed successfully through statistical correlation tests. The overall aim of this paper is to motivate the proposed modifications, the NERC framework and (modified) scoping reviews more generally as a formidable tool for informing horizon scanning, decision-making and pre-emptive policy development.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48239,"journal":{"name":"Futures","volume":"158 ","pages":"Article 103340"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhancing the horizon scanning utility of futures-oriented systematic and scoping reviews\",\"authors\":\"Eray Arda Akartuna ,&nbsp;Shane D. Johnson ,&nbsp;Amy Thornton\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.futures.2024.103340\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We propose modifications for scoping (and by extension systematic) review methodologies to improve their contribution to horizon scanning exercises. As a means of systematically collecting, coding and synthesising literature, we argue that scoping reviews are ideal for conducting initial environmental scans of a topic of interest, trend analyses and scenario developments. To demonstrate this utility, this paper uses a futures-oriented scoping review of technology-enhanced money laundering and terrorist financing risks as an example. At the forefront of the proposed modifications is a quality assessment framework assessing reviewed publications for their <em>neutrality, evidence, relevance</em> and <em>clarity</em> (NERC). This proposed framework is not only ideal for appraising publications but also as an indication of likelihood, namely whether their discussed insights constitute possible, plausible or probable alternative futures. The validity of the NERC framework in achieving these aims is assessed successfully through statistical correlation tests. The overall aim of this paper is to motivate the proposed modifications, the NERC framework and (modified) scoping reviews more generally as a formidable tool for informing horizon scanning, decision-making and pre-emptive policy development.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48239,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Futures\",\"volume\":\"158 \",\"pages\":\"Article 103340\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Futures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724000235\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Futures","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724000235","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们建议修改范围审查(以及系统审查)方法,以提高其对前景扫描工作的贡献。作为系统收集、编码和综合文献的一种手段,我们认为范围界定审查是对感兴趣的主题进行初步环境扫描、趋势分析和情景发展的理想方法。为了证明这种实用性,本文以对技术增强型洗钱和恐怖主义融资风险进行面向未来的范围界定审查为例。所提议的修改最重要的是一个质量评估框架,该框架从中立性、实证性、相关性和清晰度(NERC)等方面对审查过的出版物进行评估。这一拟议框架不仅是评估出版物的理想工具,也是可能性的指示器,即所讨论的见解是 否构成可能的、可信的或可能的替代未来。通过统计相关性测试,成功评估了 NERC 框架在实现这些目标方面的有效性。本文的总体目标是推动修改建议、NERC 框架和(修改后的)范围界定审查更广泛地成为为前景扫描、决策和先发制人的政策制定提供信息的有力工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Enhancing the horizon scanning utility of futures-oriented systematic and scoping reviews

We propose modifications for scoping (and by extension systematic) review methodologies to improve their contribution to horizon scanning exercises. As a means of systematically collecting, coding and synthesising literature, we argue that scoping reviews are ideal for conducting initial environmental scans of a topic of interest, trend analyses and scenario developments. To demonstrate this utility, this paper uses a futures-oriented scoping review of technology-enhanced money laundering and terrorist financing risks as an example. At the forefront of the proposed modifications is a quality assessment framework assessing reviewed publications for their neutrality, evidence, relevance and clarity (NERC). This proposed framework is not only ideal for appraising publications but also as an indication of likelihood, namely whether their discussed insights constitute possible, plausible or probable alternative futures. The validity of the NERC framework in achieving these aims is assessed successfully through statistical correlation tests. The overall aim of this paper is to motivate the proposed modifications, the NERC framework and (modified) scoping reviews more generally as a formidable tool for informing horizon scanning, decision-making and pre-emptive policy development.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Futures
Futures Multiple-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
124
期刊介绍: Futures is an international, refereed, multidisciplinary journal concerned with medium and long-term futures of cultures and societies, science and technology, economics and politics, environment and the planet and individuals and humanity. Covering methods and practices of futures studies, the journal seeks to examine possible and alternative futures of all human endeavours. Futures seeks to promote divergent and pluralistic visions, ideas and opinions about the future. The editors do not necessarily agree with the views expressed in the pages of Futures
期刊最新文献
Feminist urban futures: Envisioning the future of Ukrainian cities through the lens of the displaced community in Valencia (Spain) Imagined futures in sustainability transitions: Towards diverse future-making Temporality in the United Nations 2030 Agenda: development or rupture? From “snowflake generation” to “agents of social change”: Recognizing the voice of Spanish young people in the post-pandemic era The politics of transdisciplinary research on societal transitions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1