Research on injury compensation and health outcomes : ignoring the problem of reverse causality led to a biased conclusion

Objective This study highlights the serious consequences of ignoring reverse causality bias in studies on compensation-related factors and health outcomes and demonstrates a technique for resolving this problem of observational data. Study Design and Setting Data from an English longitudinal study on factors, including claims for compensation, associated with recovery from neck pain (whiplash) after rear-end collisions are used to demonstrate the potential for reverse causality bias. Although it is commonly believed that claiming compensation leads to worse recovery, it is also possible that poor recovery may lead to compensation claims—a point that is seldom considered and never addressed empirically. This pedagogical study compares the association between compensation claiming and recovery when reverse causality bias is ignored and when it is addressed, controlling for the same observable factors. Results When reverse causality is ignored, claimants appear to have a worse recovery than nonclaimants; however, when reverse causality bias is addressed, claiming compensation appears to have a beneficial effect on recovery, ceteris paribus. Conclusion To avert biased policy and judicial decisions that might inadvertently disadvantage people with compensable injuries, there is an urgent need for researchers to address reverse causality bias in studies on compensation-related factors and health.

ACE research vignette 041: Business Planning and the emergence of new ventures

This series of research vignettes is aimed at sharing current and interesting research findings from our team of international Entrepreneurship researchers. In this vignette, Christophe Garonne and Per Davidsson examine the value of business planning for business start-ups.

Should we implement monitoring or research for conservation?

[Letter to editor, brief commentary or brief communication ]

Navigating the methodological mire : practical epistemology in design research

The field of design research is a marketplace of methodological diversity. It isn't just that there are many different research methods in the field, but that there are many different methodological 'foundations' - principles for how research can and should be done, for how contributions to knowledge ought to be pursued. This is not particularly surprising given how broadly 'design' is often conceptualised. Herbert Simon (1996) suggested "the proper study of mankind is the science of design"; Nigel Cross has identified a principal difference between humankind and the animal kingdom to be our ability to design. In light of such encompassing notions of design it is difficult to imagine how the field of design research should exhibit any less diversity than that found within and among the arts, humanities, the human and social sciences.

Not just what they want, but why they want it: Traditional market research to deep customer insights

Purpose This paper explores advantages and disadvantages of both traditional market research and deep customer insight methods in order to lay the platform for revealing how a relationship between these two domains could be optimised during firm-based innovation. Design/methodology/approach The paper reports on an empirical research study conducted with thirteen Australian based firms engaged in a design-led approach to innovation. Firms were facilitated through a design-led approach where the process of gathering deep customer insights was isolated and investigated further in comparison to traditional market research methods. Findings Results show that deep customer insight methods are able to provide fresh, non-obvious ways of understanding customer needs, problems and behaviours that can become the foundation of new business opportunities. Findings concluded that deep customer insights methods provide the critical layer to understand why customers do and don’t engage with businesses. Revealing why was not accessible in traditional market research methods. Research limitations/implications The theoretical outcome of this study is a complementary methods matrix, providing guidance on appropriate implementation of research methods in accordance with a project’s timeline to optimise the complementation of traditional market research methods with design-led customer engagement methods. Practical implications Deep customer insight methods provide fresh, non-obvious ways of understanding customer needs, problems and behaviours that can become the foundation of new business opportunities. It is hoped that those in a position of data collection are encouraged to experiment and use deep customer insight methods to connect with their customers on a meaningful level and translate these insights into value. Originality/value This paper provides original value to a new understanding how design techniques can be applied to compliment and strengthen existing market research strategies. This is crucial in an era where business competition hinges on a subtle and often intimate understanding of customer needs and behaviours.