In order to enhance safety and prevent the recurrence of major accidents it is necessary to understand why they occur. This understanding is gained by utilising accident causation theory to explain why a certain combination of events, conditions and actions led to a given outcome: the process of accident analysis. At present, the systems approach to accident analysis is arguably the dominant research paradigm. Based on the concepts of systems theory, it views accidents as the result of unexpected and uncontrolled relationships between a system s components. Various researchers claim that use of the systems approach, via systemic accident analysis, provides a deeper understanding of accidents when compared with traditional theories. However, the systems approach and its analysis techniques are yet to be widely adopted by the practitioner community and, therefore, a research-practice gap exists. The implication of such a gap is that practitioners may be applying outdated accident causation theory and, consequently, producing ineffective safety recommendations. The aim of this thesis was to develop the current understanding of the systemic accident analysis research-practice gap by providing a description of the gap, considering its extent and examining issues associated with bridging it. Four studies were conducted to achieve this aim. The first study involved an evaluation of the systemic accident analysis literature and techniques, in order to understand how their characteristics could influence the research-practice gap. The findings of the study revealed that the systems approach is not presented in a consistent or clear manner within the research literature and that this may hinder its acceptance by practitioners. In addition, a number of issues were identified (e.g. model validation, analyst bias and limited usage guidance) which may influence the use of systemic analysis methods within industry. The examination of how the analysis activities of practitioners may contribute to the gap motivated Study 2. This study involved conducting semi-structured interviews with 42 safety professionals and various factors, which affect the awareness, adoption and usage of the systems approach and its analysis methods, were highlighted. The combined findings of Studies 1 and 2 demonstrate that the systemic accident analysis research-practice gap is multifaceted in nature. Study 3 investigated the extent of the gap by considering whether the most widely used analysis technique (the Swiss Cheese Model) can provide a systems approach to accident analysis. The analysis of a major rail accident was performed with a model based on the Swiss Cheese Model and two systemic analysis methods. The outputs and usage of the three analysis tools were compared and indicate that the Swiss Cheese Model does provide a means of conducting systemic accident analysis. Therefore, the extent of the research-practice gap may not be as considerable as some proponents of the systems approach suggest. The final study aimed to gain an insight into the application of a systemic accident analysis method by practitioners, in order to understand whether it meets their needs. Six trainee accident investigators took part in an accident investigation simulation and subsequently analysed the data collected during the exercise with the Systems Theoretic Accident Modelling and Processes model. The outputs of the participants analyses were studied along with the evaluation feedback they provided via a questionnaire and focus group. The main findings of the study indicate that the analysis technique does not currently meet the usability or graphical output requirements of practitioners and, unless these issues are addressed, will struggle to gain acceptance within industry. When considering the research findings as a whole a number of issues are highlighted. Firstly, given the benefits of adopting the systems approach, efforts to bridge the systemic accident analysis research-practice gap should be made. However, the systemic analysis methods may not be best suited to analyse every type of accident and, therefore, should be considered as one part of an investigator s analysis toolkit . Adapting the systemic analysis methods to meet the needs of practitioners and communicating the systems approach more effectively represent two options for bridging the gap. However, due to the multidimensional nature of the gap and the wide variety of individuals, organisations and industries that perform accident analysis, it seems likely that tailored solutions will be required. Furthermore, due to the differing needs of the research and practice communities, efforts to bridge the gap should focus on collaboration between the two communities rather than attempting to close the gap entirely.

Implementing research-based practices in classrooms as a means of increasing achievement in mathematics for all students requires an understanding of many complex factors that influence classroom change. Situating the role of the teacher as critical to these efforts, teacher inquiry provides a theoretical framework from which to understand the importance of teacher-created knowledge in implementing new instructional practices. A teacher-researcher partnership may provide the support system for teacher inquiry to occur. This study investigated the effects of a research partnership on the implementation of research-based practices, specifically considering the views of teachers participating in the partnership, the differences in implementation based on interactions with researchers, and the features of the partnership that supported the implementation of new practices. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis of secondary data was used to understand the experiences of twelve teachers who participated in a research partnership among a research-based non-profit, a national coalition of public schools, and two universities. Results from observation, survey, and interview data found teachers had a complex self-perception of their own roles in the teacher-researcher partnership including being a collaborator, a learner, and an agent of change. Additionally, teachers who interacted with researchers embraced the new materials and instructional practices more so than those who did not. Features of the partnership that were supportive of the implementation process included a focus on the teacher, evolution and responsiveness, and collaboration and integration. Implications for teachers, researchers, administrators, and others are discussed. / CITE/Mathematics and Science Education

There has been a long-standing need in the field of psychotherapy to document progress and show effectiveness. The evidence-based practice (EBP) movement has had considerable influence in the field of psychology as evidenced by the APA task force that adopted the stance of evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP) to ensure quality and accountability for psychological services as well as the integration of science and practice. One of the primary components of EBPP is the use of routine outcome measures (ROMs), which seek to integrate research with practice while simultaneously documenting progress and enhancing treatment. Despite the wave of ROM in the field, implementation rates have remained low. Research has brought forth many practical and philosophical concerns of therapists using these measures in routine practice including time burden and local validity. The Clinically Adaptive Multidimensional Outcome Survey (CAMOS) was created to directly address clinicians' concerns with a specific focus on concerns of local validity. The CAMOS was designed to monitor several dimensions of functions, thus covering a wide range of issues. In this study the item pool proposed for the CAMOS was factor analyzed, and acceptable fit was found for a 6-factor model that contained 42 items. The 6 factors include (a) psychological distress, (b) relationship distress, (c) therapy expectations, (d) spiritual distress, (e) physical health distress, and (f) work/school distress. It is of note that spirituality emerged as a distinct factor with this data set and the implications and applications are discussed. With this multidimensional foundation, clinicians could more flexibly use the CAMOS to increase local validity. Clinical applications and future directions are discussed.

For more than 40 years, a tremendous number of studies have empirically explored the relationship between Corporate Environmental Performance (CEP) and Corporate Financial Performance (CFP). This study considers the relationship from a new perspective—via a qualitative research approach based on expert interviews. First, practitioners are queried for their view on the link between CEP and CFP and how to measure it. Since the vast majority see a positive relationship, this study contributes with a new form of evidence that it pays to be green. The chosen qualitative approach also allows a more detailed analysis of underlying cause-and-effect mechanisms. For instance, interviewed practitioners emphasize a direct and indirect impact from CEP on CFP. Second, the study conducts interviews with experts from research and associations (non-practitioners) and compares the viewpoints of the two interview groups. One prevalent difference refers to the fact that non-practitioners do not focus on the two impact levels. Moreover, business experts perceive the link between CEP and CFP as much less complex and reveal more pragmatically oriented considerations. The study then discusses how the interview results and identified differences can be used to direct future research and to support corporations in their move towards sustainability.

For more than 40 years, a tremendous number of studies have empirically explored the relationship between Corporate Environmental Performance (CEP) and Corporate Financial Performance (CFP). This study considers the relationship from a new perspective—via a qualitative research approach based on expert interviews. First, practitioners are queried for their view on the link between CEP and CFP and how to measure it. Since the vast majority see a positive relationship, this study contributes with a new form of evidence that it pays to be green. The chosen qualitative approach also allows a more detailed analysis of underlying cause-and-effect mechanisms. For instance, interviewed practitioners emphasize a direct and indirect impact from CEP on CFP. Second, the study conducts interviews with experts from research and associations (non-practitioners) and compares the viewpoints of the two interview groups. One prevalent difference refers to the fact that non-practitioners do not focus on the two impact levels. Moreover, business experts perceive the link between CEP and CFP as much less complex and reveal more pragmatically oriented considerations. The study then discusses how the interview results and identified differences can be used to direct future research and to support corporations in their move towards sustainability.