given issue may attract psychological theorists in one country and empirical researchers in another.
Ways of handling and managing data, including expectations regarding access to datasets, will not necessarily be similar across nations. Within research teams, negotiations about power and status may be complex and reflect different expectations of authorship or control over research design. Conventional work habits, including pacing, workloads, vacations, or sensitivity to deadlines and reporting requirements, may vary. What is considered adequate protection for human subjects also may differ. The concept of consent—what it consists of and who may provide it on behalf of whom—is different in different parts of the world. Thus, crossing an international border to conduct research will entail negotiation and cooperation across different institutional arrangements, educational backgrounds, cultural expectations, research habits, funding patterns, and public policy concerns.
The point of this workshop was not to labor over the terminology or to arrive at agreed-upon definitions of international research, cross-cultural studies, cultural psychology, transnational communities of practice, or global perspectives on social science. Rather, workshop participants understood collaboration to involve potentially crossing several types of boundaries. The focus was on the specific challenges to research collaborations undertaken across boundaries and how to surmount the barriers and maximize the mutual benefits of such endeavors. Workshop participants therefore sought to identify the unique value of international research collaborations, current barriers to undertaking such collaborations, and avenues to improving and facilitating these initiatives.
A number of good suggestions were generated during the discussion at the workshop and are summarized in Chapter 3. While committee members recognize that such a list would have been helpful to the community, it was outside the parameters established for this workshop report.