SACE Stage 2 Cross-disciplinary Studies flashcards

32 cards. Read the term and the definition here. The deck at the top of this page is optional.

Cross-disciplinary question

An open, contestable question that cannot be answered using one discipline's concepts and methods alone, requiring evidence from at least two distinct knowledge bases to be integrated.

Multidisciplinary approach

An approach where several disciplines examine the same issue in parallel but retain their separate methods and conclusions, without blending them into a single integrated synthesis.

Interdisciplinary approach

An approach in which concepts, methods and evidence from different disciplines are combined and modified to produce an integrated understanding that no single discipline could reach alone.

Transdisciplinary approach

An approach where academic disciplines collaborate with non-academic stakeholders, such as communities or industry, to co-produce the question, methods and interpretation of findings.

Triangulation

Using two or more independent sources, methods or researchers to examine the same claim; convergence across them reduces uncertainty but does not constitute proof.

Informed consent

A research ethics requirement that participants receive full information about the study's purpose, procedures, risks and data use, and voluntarily agree to take part without coercion.

Scope statement

An explicit declaration of the boundaries of an inquiry, such as time period, location and population, which keeps the question answerable within available time and evidence.

Primary versus secondary evidence

Primary evidence is data collected firsthand for the inquiry; secondary evidence is analysis produced by others. Primary ranks higher but still requires quality appraisal.

Disciplinary paradigm

The set of assumptions, accepted methods, key concepts and evidence standards a discipline uses; naming it reveals why disciplines may judge the same claim differently.

Level of analysis

The scale at which a claim is made, such as individual, group, institutional or global; causes at one level may not explain outcomes at another.

Equivocation across disciplines

A reasoning error where a term borrowed from another discipline, such as 'resilience' or 'system', keeps its old meaning while being used in a new context.

Correlation and causation

An association between variables does not establish that one causes the other; causal claims need a mechanism, correct temporal order and control of confounding variables.

Confounding variable

An unmeasured factor that influences both the supposed cause and the observed effect, creating a spurious association that can mislead causal interpretation.

Absolute versus relative risk

Relative risk compares rates as a ratio; absolute risk states the actual number affected. Reporting only relative risk can exaggerate the apparent size of an effect.

Model limitations

Every model simplifies reality by omitting variables and assuming relationships; stating what is omitted and how that could alter conclusions is part of valid use.

Source credibility appraisal

Judging a source by author expertise, publication venue, date, funding, replication status and whether claims are supported by cited evidence rather than assertion.

Warrant in argument

The usually unstated assumption that links evidence to a claim; identifying the warrant shows exactly where an argument can be challenged or defended.

False dilemma

A fallacy that presents only two options when more exist, forcing a choice between extremes and excluding middle positions or alternative solutions.

Straw man fallacy

Misrepresenting or exaggerating an opposing position so it is easier to attack, then refuting the distorted version instead of the actual argument.

Post hoc fallacy

Assuming that because one event followed another, the first caused the second; temporal sequence alone does not establish a causal relationship.

Counterargument protocol

Stating the strongest opposing position fairly, then responding with evidence or a limited concession; refuting a weakened version of the opposing view proves nothing.

Assumption audit

Listing what must be true for a conclusion to hold, then ranking each assumption by how severely its failure would undermine the argument.

Divergent and convergent thinking

Divergent thinking generates many varied possibilities without early judgement; convergent thinking then screens them against explicit criteria such as feasibility, ethics and evidence.

Analogy as illustration

An analogy clarifies a point but is not evidence; it supports reasoning only when the relevant structural features, not surface similarities, genuinely match.

Calibrated uncertainty language

Matching claim strength to evidence strength: 'demonstrates' for replicated findings, 'suggests' for single studies, and 'may' for modelled or projected outcomes.

Group decision rule

A pre-agreed method for reaching team decisions, such as consensus for shared ownership or majority vote under time pressure, recorded with rationale and dissent.

Contribution log

A dated record of which team member completed which task, supporting fair assessment of individual accountability within a collaborative project.

Conflict escalation ladder

A staged procedure for disagreement: clarify the issue, return to shared criteria, then seek third-party mediation; personal attack is never a permitted step.

Audience analysis

Identifying the audience's prior knowledge, purpose and expectations so that register, jargon level, format and evidence type can be adjusted appropriately.

Honest data presentation

Labelling axes and units, keeping scales proportional, citing sources on figures and avoiding decorative elements that distort comparison between values.

Reflective cycle

A structured process of describing an experience, analysing what caused the outcome, evaluating it against criteria, and planning a specific changed action.

Actionable feedback

Feedback that is specific, behavioural, timely and tied to stated criteria, so the recipient can identify exactly what to continue or change.