Identifying Culture as a Threshold of Shared Knowledge

Caulkins, D. Douglas

doi:10.1177/1470595804047813

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(15 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in almost all of these cases, the group and individual competence scores were too low and variable, respectively, to conclude that they shared a "weak" mental model. Rather, the mental models in these instances would be considered "fragmented" (Caulkins 2004) or "turbulent" (Caulkins and Hyatt 1999). The exception was the whole group and conservationists with regard to the causes of the problems with the river flows.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In both http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss1/art45/ cases, approximately 45% of the group shared similar beliefs regarding the causes. Over time, this weak agreement may increase into consensus or a shared mental model or, alternatively, may weaken further (Caulkins 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is important to note that the 3 to 1 ratio between the first and second eigenvalues has been widely accepted in the consensus analysis literature as the appropriate threshold for determining consensus (Romney et al 1987, Borgatti 1996b, Romney 1999. More recently, several scholars have extended the logic of consensus analysis to the interpretation of data that is below this threshold (for example, Caulkins and Hyatt 1999, Handwerker 2002, Caulkins 2004). The diagnostic criteria we used as a guide to interpret our data are presented in Table 1 (in article).…”

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A first objective of the research, and this paper, is to explore the scientific merits and challenges of consensus analysis as a technique for eliciting, analyzing, and documenting elements of mental models. Drawing on a large body of work on consensus analysis, including Caulkins and Hyatt (1999) and Caulkins (2004), we were interested in understanding the following points:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Using Consensus Analysis to Assess Mental Models about Water Use and Management in the Crocodile River Catchment, South Africa

Stone-Jovicich¹,

Lynam²,

Leitch³

et al. 2011

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT. The content, structure, and distribution of mental models can be elicited and measured using a variety of methods. In this article we explore a method for eliciting mental models within the context of water use and management in South Africa. This method is consensus analysis, a technique developed in cognitive anthropology. We used it to analyze qualitative data from semistructured interviews, pilesorts, and questionnaires to test quantitatively the degree of sharing and diversity of mental models within and across social groups. The consensus analysis method focused on comparing the mental models of two key stakeholder groups in the Crocodile River catchment in South Africa, i.e., conservationists and irrigators, to better understand the level of consensus between these groups. We specifically investigated the level of agreement regarding: (1) major water users of the Crocodile River, (2) causes of the current problems with flows in the river, (3) consequences of the river not flowing, and 4) priorities for future use. We discuss the results and examine the strengths and challenges of consensus analysis for eliciting and measuring mental models. We also evaluated the usefulness of this method in assisting natural resource managers to identify strategies for improving integrated management of water resources.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Using Consensus Analysis to Assess Mental Models about Water Use and Management in the Crocodile River Catchment, South Africa

Stone-Jovicich¹,

Lynam²,

Leitch³

et al. 2011

E&S

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…al. 1991, Hofstede 1991, Martin 1992, 2002, Ouchi 1981, Ouchi and Wilkins 1985, Caulkins 2004, Peters and Waterman 1982, Schein 1985. In addition, I will illustrate the usefulness of the modified processual theory with case studies from my research on small, high-technology firms in peripheral regions of the UK.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%