Significance

The final aspect of the research to consider is its significance; i.e., what impact does my research make? For this consideration, I turn to the metrics utilized by Hoffman and Deffenbacher (eco-psych:hoffman1). They state that there are two primary ways in which any theory can be viewed--ecologically and epistemologically. In addition, each of these can be subdivided into four aspects. These eight categories are:    

• ecological validity--the theory relates to the human condition. In my case, this is imminently true, given my domain and processes I am modeling.
• ecological relevance--the theory relates to things humans see and do. Again, by relying on real-world stories, the ISAAC theory scores a plus on this metric.
• ecological salience--the theory relates to significant things that human see or do. This one is a little more difficult to argue. While creativity and reading are important aspects of a human's life, the type of reading (narrative) which I have proposed a theory of, could be argued to not be as significant as some other domain. If the theory was expanded to include more reading types, this would be a plus; at the moment, it is a neutral.
• ecological representativeness--the theory relate to things which humans often see or do. Another plus for my work.
• epistemological validity--the theory makes sense in terms of other available theories and methodology. The nature of my framework approach ensures this fact.
• epistemological relevance--the theory relies on existing theoretical concepts. Again, this is particularly true in my work.
• epistemological salience--the theory relies on theoretical concepts which are regarded as important. Another true statement in regard to my work.
• epistemological representativeness--the theory relies on theoretical concepts which other researchers make frequent use of. This is another questionable point. While some other researchers make use of the same sorts of supporting theories which I use, they are not in wide use by a wide audience. For this metric, my work has to be judged a minus. Notice, though, that while strictly a minus, it is partially this very uniqueness of the work which leads to it having a large potential impact on the field--it sets forth new ideas and reformulates some older ones.

With eight criteria, my work scores a definite plus on six, a neutral on one, and a minus on another. Thus, my work should be regarded as having both ecological and epistemological significance.