Year of Award

2023

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Type

Master of Science (MS)

Degree Name

Wildlife Biology

Department or School/College

Wildlife Biology

Committee Chair

Elizabeth Metcalf

Commitee Members

Joshua Millspaugh, John Chandler, Doug Emlen

Keywords

intellectual diversity, wildlife conservation, publishing biases, text mining, intellectual diversity survey

Publisher

University of Montana

Subject Categories

Ecology and Evolutionary Biology | Social Justice | Social Statistics | Theory, Knowledge and Science

Abstract

Academic publishing processes and standards play a fundamental role in communicating, reviewing, and expanding scientific knowledge in wildlife conservation. However, various publishing biases privilege some research perspectives and worldviews while limiting others. These biases directly impact intellectual diversity, or differences in ontology, axiology, and epistemology. This study aims to quantify intellectual diversity in the field of wildlife conservation and identify how publishing biases affect knowledge available to researchers and decision-makers worldwide.

The study employed a sample of 50,000 articles published between 2018 and 2022, collected from the Web of Science database. To analyze the vast amount of article records, natural language processing techniques, including topic modeling, were applied to article abstracts. This enabled the identification of global differences in prevalent topics, theories, and methods in wildlife conservation research. By connecting these trends with researcher social diversity, the study seeks to understand the influence of diverse perspectives on research design and knowledge production. Additionally, an intellectual diversity survey was sent to a randomized sample of international and domestic authors to gather data on differences in axiology and epistemology as well as various publishing culture dynamics.

Results reveal the existence of several biases in publishing culture, aligning with previous research. Moreover, language bias emerged as a primary concern, with researchers who did not speak English as a first language experiencing publishing biases most strongly. Differences in epistemological and axiological beliefs were also observed between demographic groups and connected to current work in value orientations and knowledge dimensions. Topic modeling revealed strong geographic differences in topics of study, and natural language processing demonstrated differences in research design.

The study contributes to the ongoing discourse on the importance of diversity in wildlife conservation, management, and policy. By addressing biases and fostering intellectual diversity, researchers can effectively tackle complex global challenges. The findings of this research will inform future efforts to explore intellectual diversity and feasible approaches to reducing inherent barriers and biases in academic publishing.

Download

Share

COinS
 

© Copyright 2023 Madeline M. Damon