Masters Dissertation Example

Fig 22. Journal level differences (a) in practical implementation of research findings (excluding policy) (b) 
in proportion of papers with findings applicable at a species level. CB and BD have the lowest levels of 
both implementation and papers with findings applicable at the species level. 
4.5 Single species analysis 
69% (n=324) of the research papers included in the analysis were focused upon a single 
species, and had marginally higher reported levels of uptake than those that were not 
(X
2
=3.95,df = 1,p= 0.04). This was not significant upon multivariate analysis. 
There were two more variables added to the analysis for single species papers: IUCN Red List 
status, and perceived importance of the species.
4.5.1 IUCN listing status 
 
IUCN listed species had a significantly higher level of implementation than non-listed species 
(fig. 23). Species for which the author was unaware of status had similar levels of 
implementation, but these responses mostly came from the USA and New Zealand where 
national listing is used over the IUCN Red List. 

---

51 
Fig 23. Relationship between IUCN listing status and uptake of findings. Findings relating to listed species 
had a significantly higher proportion of uptake than those that were not listed (X
2
=10.18,df = 4,p=0.04) 
CE=Critically Endangered, DD=Data Deficient, Threatened=any other category of threat, 
Unaware=author not aware 
 
4.5.2 Multivariate single species analysis
Analysis of the single species data gave a similar minimum adequate model (table 8), but the 
significant interaction between recommendations and IUCN listing status of the species 
lowered the significance of the previous interactions and resulted in deletion of year, status of 
study country, and author capacity from the model. Involvement of flagship species (p=0.06, 
df=294) and endemic species (p=0.11, df=295) were marginally non significant.