As part of the Research and Knowledge Exchange Development Framework, RKEO are holding a session on ‘Writing a Justification of Resources’. The session will provide an overview of the Justification of Resources document, and will offer tips for writing this section of the application form. Examples of effective Justifications of Resources will be provided.
BRIAN will be upgrading to a new version next month. The main improvements from this upgrade include:
New Impact Tracking Module
New Homepage
More User Friendly Navigation
These new and improved features will make BRIAN easier and simplier to use for everyone, whilst also providing a valuable tool to academics helping them record the impact of their research
British Cycling has delivered some of the UK’s most stunning sporting triumphs over the past decade. But success has brought scrutiny – alongside parliamentary committee hearings about mysterious jiffy bags and reports of a slack approach to governance has been a relentless undercurrent of stories and testimony about sexism in the sport.
Most memorably perhaps, Jess Varnish went public with allegations against British Cycling technical director Shane Sutton in 2016. She claimed he had dropped her from the squad and told her “to go and have a baby”. He denied saying this.
Two years before this, gaining less public attention, Nicole Cooke documented with meticulous detail the sexism encountered throughout her international cycling career in her autobiography The Breakaway. And in evidence given to a Select Committee hearing, the road race gold medal winner from the Beijing Olympics said she had been branded a troublemaker. Both Cooke, and track cycling star
Victoria Pendleton have spoken out in support of Varnish’s integrity and against the culture that became established in their sport.
Frustration
That stack of evidence will only grow now that former road world champion and London Olympics silver medalist, Lizzie Armistead has raised the issue in her upcoming autobiography Steadfast. She includes the uncomfortable admission that she was perceived as the “plaything” of male cyclists at a party when she was a 19-year-old hopeful.
Perhaps more tellingly, however, you can also feel her reluctance to tackle the issue of sexism and a desire to set apart sporting achievement from that context. In an interview with the Guardian, she said:
I want to be world champion again, and that is the best way for me to represent my sport. Win it fiercely, win it impressively and excitingly. The equivalent man isn’t sat at every interview defending his sex, so I don’t feel that’s what I have to do.
This is a critical point about what it means to be a successful female athlete and to publicly tell a story of sexism in your sport.
Post-feminist sport
Western contemporary culture has become defined in part by so-called “post-feminism”. We can best describe this as a kind of popular feminism where the idea has emerged of the “pretty and powerful” woman. Perhaps the iconic moment in the construction of this archetype came with the 1990s pop group The Spice Girls. The concept they popularised of “girl power” usefully illustrates the overemphasis on individual women’s so-called “empowerment”.
In recent years, post-feminism has been linked to an increase in the visibility of female athletes in the sporting media. Female athletes are often (self-) represented as strong and resistant to gendered limitations. This reinforces their seemingly abundant opportunities for liberation and upward mobility in elite competitive sport.
And so post-feminism demands that successful high-profile female athletes embody the normative signifiers of heterosexual femininity and competitive advantage. Many do – and their achievements as both “pretty and powerful” are hailed by post-feminism as proof of equal opportunity in western societies as well as in elite competitive sport.
For critical feminists, the warning is that when individual women “can have it all” we are not actually combating systemic gender inequalities. This is because the idea and actuality obscure the subtle, lived reality of everyday sexism. The idea that women can have it all ends up reassuring people that feminism is no longer necessary. Problems are turned into stories about conflict between individuals, a tactic used to disparage feminism and to silence voices that divulge details of discrimination and abuse. All the while, the faults in the system go unaddressed.
We can argue that elite female athletes are offered freedoms and individual choice at a cost – to their own integrity and to a broader, collective feminist politics. Such a process promotes individual choice, causing us to overlook the practices and cultures that propel the systems of gender inequality in sport. British Cycling has emerged as a useful reminder of this dynamic and, equally, those who are speaking up are a useful reminder that so-called “troublemakers” are exactly what is needed to challenge it.
Risk and reward
There is a cost. There are considerable cultural expectations for female athletes to fulfil the “pretty and powerful” post-feminist ideal. Athletes who break these conventions are taking a personal and professional risk. At the very least, they may limit their post-career marketability.
In her autobiography, Cooke challenged post-feminist sentiments. Instead, she drew from a more traditional feminism to offer a critique of how the structures of elite competitive sport treat women athletes as not equal to their male counterparts. Cooke, we suggest, is an unusual voice of active feminism in sport. Her autobiography can be viewed as a political intervention to break the cycle of silence surrounding sexism and an important model for how to deal with gender trouble in sport. Her example may well have paved the way for Varnish, Pendleton and Armistead to speak out.
Feminism’s dilemma really lies in the popularity of post-feminist ideas among women and girls who incorporate them into their sporting experience. We should be aware that feminist advocates and role models might be as unpopular with young women as they are with some men. The “pretty and powerful” post-feminist success story is more palatable and less troublesome.
If Cooke’s story had gained the traction it deserved, then we might not have been so surprised by the allegations from Varnish. Cycling – and women’s sport more broadly – would benefit from a conscious awareness of the post-feminist filters through which we all view it. Such awareness might ensure that women who do speak out about sexism are not drowned out or dismissed as individual troublemakers.
Professor Heather Hartwell will be delivering a workshop on April 27th 2017 that will help participants gain insight into how it is possible to build resilience in the area of Research and Knowledge Exchange.
This session will explore how it may be possible to build resilience in the area of research and knowledge exchange, where rejection for funding and from publishers is common. The speaker will offer their views of how resilience can be built and how to overcome obstacles. There will be the opportunity for discussion around the topic.
For those interested in booking onto the course, please follow the link here.
If you would like further information about the workshop, please contact Ehren Milner (emilner@bournemouth.ac.uk)
The session is being held as part of the Research and Knowledge Exchange Development Framework, and will offer some insights into what NIHR are looking for in grant applications to their schemes. You’ll hear from NIHR RDS advisers on what makes a good grant proposal, and from Simon Goodwin, Research for Patient Benefit Programme Manager for the South West. The afternoon session will consist of one-to-one appointments for those who would like to discuss their own proposal with Simon and/or an RDS adviser. The session is open to academics from all Faculties, and clinicians in the local health service wishing to pursue research in the fields of health and social care.
Date: Wednesday 28th June 2017
Time: 10:30-16:00 (please note that 1:1 appointments are available between 13:45-16:00)
Venue: Fusion Building, Talbot Campus
How to book: Registration is FREE and lunch will be provided. Places are limited and will be allocated on a ‘first come, first served’ basis. Find out more and register.
For further information, please contact Lisa Gale-Andrews, RKEO Research Facilitator.
Professor Ann Hemingway (FHSS) and Professor Adele Ladkin (FM) have recently been successful in gaining EU funding (2 SEAS strand) for a project entitled Staying Active and Independent for Longer (SAIL). This is a three and a half year project piloting eleven different social innovations in three countries focused on helping older people to stay active and independent for longer. The project partners come from the public sector, third sector, universities and SME’s, and include the following.
Coastal regions in the 2 Seas Area have to deal with specific challenges in relation to ageing as they are confronted with a particular mix of ageing people. This not only includes local elderly, but also the influx of ageing newcomers and tourists of an increasing average age. As this population puts pressure on health and social care systems, it is essential to enable them to stay active and independent for longer, to improve their wellbeing and quality of life to reduce costs and pressures on care systems.
Professor Hemingway (FHSS) and Professor Ladkin (FM) at BU are running the international feasibility study for this multi million pound project. This project represents cross-faculty research success combining public health and tourism expertise at BU.
On Tuesday, 23rd May 2016, BU’s Research and Knowledge Exchange Office (RKEO) will be hosting a Sandpit event on Health & Wellbeing.
Which means…?
We’re seeking to come up with novel research which addresses challenges in health & wellbeing. With increasing pressure on the NHS, we need to consider how we can take responsibility for our own health & wellbeing. Potential areas to address this challenge may include but are not limited to, digital health & technology (apps, devices), sport, healthy diet & exercise, legal considerations (i.e. your body your choice), media, psychology, social care etc.
So, who should attend?
We want anyone who thinks they might have something to contribute. We will also be inviting relevant external attendees to contribute to the day.
What do I need to prepare in advance? What will the sandpit entail?
Absolutely nothing in advance. During the session, you’ll be guided through a process which results in the development of research ideas. The process facilitates creativity, potentially leading to innovative and interdisciplinary research ideas. These ideas will be explored with other attendees, and further developed based on the feedback received.
What if I don’t have time to think about ideas in advance?
You don’t need to do this but it will help. Attendees will come from a range of backgrounds so we expect that there will be lively conversations resulting from these different perspectives.
What about afterwards? Do I need to go away and do loads of work?
Well… that depends! The interactive day will result in some novel research ideas. Some of these may be progressed immediately; others might need more time to develop. You may find common ground with other attendees which you choose to take forward in other ways, such as writing a paper or applying for research funding.
What if my topic area is really specific, and doesn’t really relate to health?
Your contribution will be very welcome! One of the main benefits of this type of event is to bring together individuals with a range of backgrounds and specialisms who are able to see things just that bit differently to one another.
So, is this just networking?
Definitely not! It is a facilitated session with the primary intention of developing innovative research ideas, which also enables the development of networks. It gives you the opportunity to explore research ideas which you may develop over time, together with the chance to find common ground with academics from across BU and beyond.
So, how do I book onto this event?
To take part in this exciting opportunity, BU staff should complete the Application Form and return this to Dianne Goodman by Tuesday 2nd May. As places are limited, this will be assessed to ensure good mix of attendees with different perspectives. Places will be confirmed w/c 8th May 2017.
By applying, you agree to attend for the full duration of the event on 23rd May (c. 9:30 – 16:00). This event will be held in BU’s Executive Business Centre (EBC).
If you have any queries prior to submitting your application, please contact Lisa Gale-Andrews, RKEO Research Facilitator.
The IEEE International Conference on Computational Intelligence in Bioinformatics and Computational Biology (IEEE CIBCB 2017) will be held at the INNSIDE Hotel, Manchester from August 23rd to 25th, 2017.
This annual conference has become a major technical event in the field of Computational Intelligence and its application to problems in biology, bioinformatics, computational biology, chemical informatics, bioengineering and related fields. The conference provides a global forum for academic and industrial scientists from a range of fields including computer science, biology, chemistry, medicine, mathematics, statistics, and engineering, to discuss and present their latest research findings from theory to applications.
The topics of interest for the special session include (but are not limited to):
Medical image classification
Medical image analysis
Expert systems for computer aided diagnosis and prognosis
Pattern recognition in the analysis of biomarkers for medical diagnosis
Deep learning in medical image processing and analysis
Ethical and Security issues in machine learning for medical diagnosis and prognosis
Up-to-date information and submission details can be found on the IEEE CIBCB 2017. The submission deadline is the 14th of April, 2017.
Prisoners eat better than hospital patients in Britain. Our research found that prisoners consume around three times more calories than patients and their diet is more in line with government nutritional recommendations.
Eating more isn’t always healthier, but when you consider that malnutrition is a big problem in hospitals, it can be. We found that the average male hospital patient consumes just 1,184 calories a day – even though the NHS recommends 2,500. Male prisoners, however, consume an average of 3,042 calories. The situation is similar for women. Female patients consume on average 1,134 calories (the recommended amount is 1,940). But female prisoners consume 3,007 calories, on average.
The patients’ food intake was measured three days before they were discharged from hospital, so we can be fairly sure that they weren’t consuming less due to ill health. And they weren’t consuming less because they were served fewer calories. All menus could provide for dietary recommendations, but it simply wasn’t eaten.
Hospitals face a number of difficulties in providing high-quality food. Dishes are prepared on a tight budget. They are cooked at a central hospital kitchen and often have to travel a considerable distance to the wards. But prison food is also prepared on a tight budget and often has to travel considerable distances from the kitchen to the prison wing.
Four years of data gathering
During our four-year study, we visited four prisons for men and two for women. In each, we carefully noted how food was prepared, delivered to the prison wing and served to the prisoners. We analysed the menu and interviewed prisoners and catering staff. We conducted four hospital studies with a similar method of data collection, which helped us to assess and compare the dietary intakes of hospital patients and prisoners. Through this we were able to identify the main differences in catering.
In hospitals, kitchen staff prepare the meals and hand them to porters who complete the delivery when they have time, between doing other tasks. Once the food reaches the ward, the responsibility for serving the food is handed to nurses. The various teams have to cooperate to ensure that food is delivered while it’s still fresh. However, providing food is not the main priority of a hospital. We noted tension between catering staff, who cared about food quality, and medical staff, who didn’t consider it a priority.
We found that the food prepared by hospital and prison kitchens – although not fine dining – has a similar nutritional quality and is presented in a similar manner. (Typical fare might include meat and two veg, a pudding or yogurt, and a piece of fruit.) In prison, food was transported quickly and food quality was maintained up to the point of service to the prisoners. The food arrived hot, comparatively fresh and could be consumed immediately without distractions. By contrast, hospital food was delayed between kitchen and patient.
A fragmented process
In the hospitals that we studied, getting food from the kitchen to the patient was a fragmented and badly coordinated process. Meals were often delayed and disrupted by medical ward rounds, tests and treatments.
The result of these delays? Food was left for too long in warming trolleys prior to being served. Hot food cools down and cold food warms up to the temperature of the ward. Food dries out and discolours. Meat curls and gravy congeals. Compared with prisons, the temperature, texture and appearance of food were all worse in hospitals by the time the food was served. Nutrients may also have diminished and the food became less palatable. Differences that are likely to account, at least in part, for the marked difference in intake between prisoners and patients.
But this is not inevitable. Delays could be reduced. Hospitals could adopt a more coordinated approach and have a dedicated team responsible for the preparation, delivery to the ward and service to the patient. The team responsible for catering would not have the conflicting priorities that clinical teams have. Although a few hospitals do have a dedicated catering team that delivers food directly to the patient, this is the exception, not the rule.
In many hospitals, nutrition is often an afterthought. Priority is given to medical tests and treatments and often ignores the role that food plays in improving the patient’s health. One governor told us that if meals were delayed or missed in prison there would be a riot.
This year BU is host to the 15th BNAC (Britain Nepal Academic Council) Nepal Study Days. This two-day event will be held next week (12-13 April) in the Executive Business Centre. The EBC is convenient due to its proximity to Bournemouth railway station. In previous years this prestigious event has been hosted by a geographically wide-spread group of universities from the University of Edinburgh to Liverpool John Moores University and from the University of Oxford to Reading University. BNAC was established in 2000 at a large meeting at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) in London of British academics and researchers interested in various aspects of Nepal.
Over twenty papers and eight posters have been accepted for next week, and there will be a specialised workshop targeted at the PhD students on ‘Capacity Building: Writing a PhD Application’. There will be sessions on post-earthquake Nepal, , history, culture & politics, sexual & reproductive health, energy as well as health & health services.
In addition, there will be a short keynote address and plenty of time for discussion. Presenters will be from across the UK with various guests coming over from Nepal. Several BU PhD students will be presenting a poster at the two-day Nepal Study Days.
Normal registration fee is £25 but members will participate for free (small charges towards cost of lunch will have to be paid). Membership costs £15 for Associate members and £30 for Ordinary members but with direct debit payment, you can enjoy a discounted rate of £12 and £24 respectively.
For details along with downloading membership form please visit this link: bnac.ac.uk/membership/
The NIHR Clinician Scientist Award offers up to 5 years funding to undertake focused training and development in order to develop specific skills that will enable a transition from basic research into clinical research or from clinical research into translational and applied research.
Maximum Award: Not specified Deadline: 1 June 2017
The EME Programme invites proposals for hypothesis driven research into the underlying mechanisms of action of clinical and public health interventions.
Maximum Award: Not specified
Deadline: 4 July 2017
Proposals are invited for a new research programme on improving understanding of shelf sea ecosystem function using integrated autonomous observing systems.
Maximum Award: £1.8 million
Deadline: 28 June 2017
The level of funding provided is flexible and can be anything from under £500,000 to around £3 million. Awards can last for up to seven years, if appropriate.
You should request a level and duration of funding that’s appropriate to your career stage, research experience and the proposed research programme.
Maximum Award: £500,000 – £3 million
Deadline: 27 July 2017
The scheme accepts investigator-led studies for highly ambitious translational research conducted in association with a clinical trial with the objective of optimising treatment and maximising patient benefit.
Maximum Award: £1 – £5 million Deadline: 20 September 2017
For more funding opportunities that are most relevant to you, you can set up your own personalised alerts on Research Professional. If you need help setting these up, just ask your School’s/Faculty’s Funding Development Officer in RKEO or view the recent blog post here.
If thinking of applying, why not add notification of your interest on Research Professional’s record of the bid so that BU colleagues can see your intention to bid and contact you to collaborate.
It’s been over six months since Bournemouth University launched its new Research & Knowledge Exchange Development Framework, which was designed to offer academics at all stages of their career opportunities to develop their skills, knowledge and capabilities.
Since its launch, over 30 sessions have taken place, including sandpits designed to develop solutions to key research challenges, workshops with funders such as the British Academy and the Medical Research Council and skills sessions to help researchers engage with the media and policy makers.
The Research & Knowledge Exchange Office is currently planning activities and sessions for next year’s training programme and would like your feedback about what’s worked well, areas for improvement and suggestions for new training sessions.
Tell us what you think via our surveyand be in with a chance of winning a £30 Amazon voucher. The deadline date is Friday 21 April.
We are happy to inform you that Bournemouth Research Information and Networking System (BRIAN) will be upgrading to a new version next month.
The main improvements from this upgrade include:
New Impact Tracking Module
New Homepage
More User Friendly Navigation
We do apologise for the inconvenience this upgrade will cause but we hope that these new and improved features will make BRIAN easier and simpler to use for everyone, whilst also providing a valuable tool to academics helping them record the impact of their research
Odours provide a richness to our perception of the world. But, despite the ubiquity of smell, we understand less about smell memory than we do about visual and auditory memory.
The classic example of smell memory is what has become known as a Proustian memory (or involuntary memory). For this phenomenon, mere exposure to a stimulus can automatically trigger a strong memory from the past. For Proust, it was tea-soaked madeleine that activated a detailed memory of his aunt’s house.
As a researcher of odour memory, people often tell me stories of smells that triggered vivid autobiographical memories. This might be the smell of hospital food, a certain alcoholic drink or the shampoo of a former lover. This strong relationship between odour and emotion is thought to result from the part of the brain involved in processing odours being positioned within the limbic system – an area of the brain integral to emotion.
Testing short-term memory for smells
Not all smell is stored in long-term memory, though. Some smells are only retained in memory for short periods. Imagine you’re shopping for a new aftershave or perfume. You wouldn’t smell two products at the same time as it would be difficult to distinguish between the two. To decide which one you prefer, you need to smell them one after the other. This means you have to temporarily store the smell and then recall it to make a comparison. We have been examining how people store odours in short-term memory and the extent to which odour memory works differently from other types of memory.
The simplest explanation is that people perform smell memory tasks by verbally labelling the odours (for example: “smells like cheese”). But using this kind of verbal strategy results in the memory task being a test of verbal rather than olfactory memory, because we’re storing the word “cheese” in verbal memory not the actual smell of cheese in odour memory. As researchers, we can limit the use of this strategy by selecting odours that are hard to name. For example, non-food odours are typically harder to label.
Another trick we use is asking participants to repeat words that are irrelevant to the task during the test; this is called “concurrent articulation”. Concurrent articulation disrupts the participant’s ability to name the odours and their ability to silently rehearse the names during the task. For example, if you’re repeating “the, the, the” while sniffing something that smells like new-mown grass, you won’t be able to store the words “new-mown grass” in your verbal memory. It’s a bit like trying to read a book while listening to the news.
It has been shown that people can perform short-term olfactory memory tasks when the odours are hard to name,
and when undertaking concurrent articulation. These findings suggest that while verbal labelling can improve the memory for an odour, people are also able to store the actual odour within memory. This is supported by research showing that different parts of the brain are activated when remembering easy-to-name and hard-to-name odours; specifically, the inferior frontal gyrus and the piriform cortex, respectively.
One method by which olfactory short-term memory has been compared with other types of memory is by examining how well people can remember a list of odours. Depending on the specifics of the memory task, people are typically good at remembering the first and last item on a list (a phenomena known as primacy and recency). There is some evidence that, for some tasks, smell memory produces different primacy and recency effects to that of other stimuli. These differences might indicate that your smell memory works in a different way to other types of memory.
Smell memory as a diagnostic tool
You might, quite reasonably, ask why you should be interested in testing smell memory, since most of the time we use our olfactory perception to make judgements about odours (that smell is nice/horrible). But research has shown that an impaired sense of smell memory is a predictor of developing dementia.
To further emphasise this link, people with the ApoE gene (a genetic risk factor for developing Alzheimer’s), who show no signs of dementia, have impaired odour identification. These findings suggest that an olfactory memory test could potentially be used as part of the armoury in detecting the early stages of dementia. Early detection is important, as the earlier the intervention, the better the outcome.
Thursday 4th May 2017, 9.30-11.00 at Talbot Campus
In this session Professor Barry Richards will take us through the story of how intellectual and political interdisciplinarity established across both education and research, defined a new academic specialism which now has courses and departments in several universities, journals and a book series with major publishers and growing connections with professional practices.
This is part of the Leading Innovation Masterclasses series.
There are two other masterclasses in May: ‘Benchmarking your students’ digital experience’ with Jisc’s Sarah Knight, and ‘The clinical doctorate model – Enabling Practitioner Research’ with Professor Vanora Hundley.
Short briefs are listed below, full project briefs are available upon request.
SPB048: Animation to raise awareness of the support available to adult children of alcoholics
Create a 2-3 minute animation that highlights the key characteristics of adult children of alcoholics (ACOA) and conveys a message that they are not alone and that change is possible.
SPB057: Raising the Game at Noc’s
Noc’s Box uses Gaming (PvP-face-to-face; Skirmish/Warhammer/Empire of the Dead…; and Role Play games) to help people with high social anxieties such as Asperger’s and other social communication/mental health issues to meet in a safe, supportive environment and, through the medium of gaming, to develop their confidence, communication and other life skills. Noc’s needs to reach more potential customers/users both in order to sustain the current business and our clubs and, vitally, to help to convince potential funders to sponsor them as a newly-formed charity. Create a marketing strategy for Noc’s Box with specific recommendations.
SPB058: Raising the Game at Noc’s: Promotional Video
Noc’s Box uses Gaming (PvP-face-to-face; Skirmish/Warhammer/Empire of the Dead…; and Role Play games) to help people with high social anxieties such as Asperger’s and other social communication/mental health issues to meet in a safe, supportive environment and, through the medium of gaming, to develop their confidence, communication and other life skills. Noc’s needs to reach more potential customers/users both in order to sustain the current business and our clubs and, vitally, to help to convince potential funders to sponsor them as a newly-formed charity. Produce a short (3 minute) promotional video for Noc’s to use to promote the charity.
Apply now
Projects are available to all undergraduate and postgraduate students at BU and can be used for their dissertation, assignment, unit or group work. Members of staff may also choose a project to set to their students. A complete list of projects is available here.
Send us an email if you would like a project brief and an application form.
Do you have a great idea for research in health or social care?
Would your team benefit from protected time and expert support to develop your idea into a competitive funding application?
The Research Design Services South West (RDS SW) and South Central (RDS SC) are delighted to offer a unique opportunity to researchers in health and social care across their regions. to attend a week-long residential Grant Writing Retreat at Dillington House, near Ilminster in Somerset from Monday 4 September to Friday 8 September 2017 inclusive. The purpose of the Retreat is to give busy professionals dedicated time to rapidly progress their research idea into fundable proposals. The Retreat will provide a supportive environment for research teams to develop high quality research proposals prior to application to national peer-reviewed funding streams. Participating teams will enjoy protected time dedicated to the development of their research proposals away from the distractions of their workplace, expert help and support from RDS adviser staff and the experience of working as part of a professional research team.
I urge you and your colleagues to have a look at the website to find out more details, the process for applying for a place on the retreat, and examples of success stories: http://rds-sw.nihr.ac.uk/rgwr.htm
The cost of the retreat is £2,850 per team of three researchers (see website for details). The opportunity to apply is open to everyone across our region.
HOWEVER, for teams that successfully apply for a place on the retreat, and that consist of at least one member of staff from the Department of Nursing and Clinical Sciences here at BU, the University can offer a limited number of places funded by the Department (2 but might be able to stretch to more). If you don’t have anybody in mind within the department but still interested in collaborating and applying for a free space offered by the university please contact us and we can facilitate this and try to find people with shared interests and ideas.
Applications for the retreat must be submitted to RDS by 1pm 26th April 2017, and it is important that you discuss your application with someone from the BUCRU/RDS team at an early stage (Sarah Thomas, Helen Allen, Sharon Docherty, Andy Powell, Peter Thomas).
Your local branch of the NIHR Research Design Service is based within theBU Clinical Research Unit (BUCRU)on the 5th floor of Royal London House. Feel free to pop in and see us, call us on 61939 orsend us an email.
BU staff can login below:
Other services
Don’t miss a post!
Subscribe for the BU Research Digest, delivered freshly every day.
It’s been over six months since Bournemouth University launched its new 
We are happy to inform you that Bournemouth Research Information and Networking System (BRIAN) will be upgrading to a new version next month.
Paper with 160,000 reads
The Month in Research: April 2024
BU Professor has been invited to a series of plenary and invited lectures.
Research reaching non-academic audiences
April’s Café Scientifique – Should we help machines understand and respond to our emotions?
Apply for up to £1,000 to deliver an event and take part in a national festival of public engagement with research
MSCA Postdoctoral Fellowships 2024
Horizon Europe News – December 2023