{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017869907076483203, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.763285024154589, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Toward Jeffersonian research programmes in ergonomics science

Thomas Jefferson believed that scientific research could lead to a fuller understanding of nature, while simultaneously addressing a persistent social problem of national or global interest. The two-fold ideals of this 'Jeffersonian research programme' fit well with the inherently practical aims of ergonomics science. However, in the past, basic and applied concerns have not always been well integrated in the discipline. This article makes a contribution, by proposing a novel metascientific framework consisting of a two-dimensional research space that addresses this problem. One dimension is methodological, representing the trade-off between experimental control and representativeness, while the other dimension is intentional, representing the trade-off between knowledge- and market-oriented purposes. The framework helps explain why it has frequently been difficult to integrate basic and applied concerns, and, at the same time, it shows that a Jeffersonian research programme for ergonomics science can be achieved by opening up degrees of freedom for research that have been comparatively unexplored. The importance of demonstrating contributions to fundamental understanding and to applied practice within the same research programme may be essential for survival and success in a climate of restricted research funding.