抗原变异可使得多种致病微生物易于逃避宿主免疫应答。表达在感染红细胞表面的恶性疟原虫红细胞表面蛋白1（PfPMP1）与感染红细胞、内皮细胞、树突状细胞以及胎盘的单个或多个受体作用，在黏附及免疫逃避中起关键的作用。每个单倍体基因组var基因家族编码约60种成员，通过启动转录不同的var基因变异体为抗原变异提供了分子基础。

疟原虫var基因转换速率变化导致抗原变异[英]／Paul H, Robert P, Christodoulou Z, et al//Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A

자연주의적 탐구조사(Naturalistic Inquiry)

In 1974 an article appeared in Science magazine with the dry-sounding title “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases” by a pair of psychologists who were not well known outside their discipline of decision theory. In it Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman introduced the world to Prospect Theory, which mapped out how humans actually behave when faced with decisions about gains and losses, in contrast to how economists assumed that people behave. Prospect Theory turned Economics on its head by demonstrating through a series of ingenious experiments that people are much more concerned with losses than they are with gains, and that framing a choice from one perspective or the other will result in decisions that are exactly the opposite of each other, even if the outcomes are monetarily the same. Prospect Theory led cognitive psychology in a new direction that began to uncover other human biases in thinking that are probably not learned but are part of our brain’s wiring.

Thinking fast and slow.

Social Network Analysis

Recording of presentation introducing narrative analysis, outlining what it is, why it can be a useful approach, how to do it and where to find out more. Presentation given at methods@manchester seminar at University of Manchester on 4 March 2010.

What is Narrative Analysis

Narratives are increasingly subject to empirical study in a wide variety of disciplines. However, in public policy, narratives are thought of almost exclusively as a poststructural concept outside the realm of empirical study. In this paper, after reviewing the major literature on narratives, we argue that policy narratives can be studied using systematic empirical approaches and introduce a “Narrative Policy Framework” (NPF) for elaboration and empirical testing. The NPF defines narrative structure and narrative content. We then discuss narrative at the micro level of analysis and examine how narratives impact individual attitudes and hence aggregate public opinion. Similarly, we examine strategies for the studying of group and elite behavior using the NPF. We conclude with seven hypotheses for researchers interested in elaborating the framework.

/pdf/a-narrative-policy-framework-clear-enough-to-be-wrong-lk3lbpopiw.pdf

A Narrative Policy Framework: Clear Enough to Be Wrong?

The Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) has influenced a generation of policy scholars with its emphasis on causal drivers, testable hypotheses, and falsification. Until recently, the role of policy narratives has been largely neglected in ACF literature partially because much of that work has operated outside of traditional social science principles, such as falsification. Yet emerging literature under the rubric of Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) demonstrates how the role of policy narratives in policy processes is studied using the same rigorous social science standards initially set forth by Paul A. Sabatier. The NPF identifies theories specifying narrative elements and strategies that are likely useful to ACF researchers as classes of variables that have yet to be integrated. Examining this proposition, we provide seven hypotheses related to critical ACF concepts including advocacy coalitions and policy beliefs, policy learning, public opinion, and strategy. Our goal is to stay within the scientific, theoretical, and methodological tradition of the ACF and show how NPF's empirical, hypotheses, and causal driven work on policy narratives identifies theories applicable to ACF research while also offering an independent framework capable of explaining the policy process through the power of policy narratives. In doing so, we believe both ACF and NPF scholarship can contribute to the advancement of our understanding of the policy process.

Policy Narratives and Policy Processes

While John Kingdon's Multiple Streams Approach (MSA) remains a key reference point in the public policy literature, few have attempted to assess MSA holistically. To assess its broader impact and trends in usage, we combine in-depth analysis of representative studies, with comprehensive coverage of MSA-inspired articles, to categorize its impact. We find that Kingdon's work makes two separate contributions. First, it has contributed to the development of “evolutionary” policy theories such as punctuated equilibrium. Second, it has prompted a large, dedicated, and often empirical, literature. However, most MSA empirical applications only engage with broader policy theory superficially. The two contributions are oddly independent of each other. We argue that these trends in application are due largely to its intuitive appeal and low “barrier to entry.” Drawing on other policy approaches, we offer suggestions to improve the MSA-inspired literature.

/pdf/kingdon-s-multiple-streams-approach-what-is-the-empirical-mg14mp220o.pdf

Kingdon's Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the Empirical Impact of this Universal Theory?

This study uses content analysis of recent Multiple Streams Approach (MSA) research to determine the scope of MSA applications, examining the consistency, and coherence with which concepts of MSA are applied. Our analysis examines peer-reviewed articles testing MSA concepts available in English published from 2000 through 2013 (N = 311). Among other findings, we observe that MSA is applied to study 65 different countries, at multiple levels of governance, across 22 different policy areas, and by researchers spanning the globe. Our findings suggest that while MSA is prolific, consistency across applications—in terms of operationalization of MSA core concepts—is needed to facilitate theoretical development of the approach.

/pdf/a-river-runs-through-it-a-multiple-streams-meta-review-5e17jc4t3e.pdf

A River Runs Through It: A Multiple Streams Meta‐Review

This chapter aims to detail the narrative policy framework (NPF) in an effort to provide a means by which policy researchers in a variety of contexts can advance scientific discoveries surrounding our central research question. Narrative strategies are used in an attempt to influence the policy process. The NPF identifies operational measures of policy beliefs through narrative elements such as characters and other symbolic, metaphorical, or contextual means by which collective understandings of the policy are generated. The NPF assumes that policy narratives operate simultaneously at three levels of analysis such as Microlevel NPF, Mesolevel NPF and Macrolevel NPF. The chapter addresses four new directions in NPF research, which include comparative public policy approaches, use of evidence, validation of digital media as a source of narrative data, and a new proposition regarding policy narrative learning in the context of policy change.

Michael D. Jones

Papers

A Narrative Policy Framework: Clear Enough to Be Wrong?

Policy Narratives and Policy Processes

Kingdon's Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the Empirical Impact of this Universal Theory?

A River Runs Through It: A Multiple Streams Meta‐Review

The Narrative Policy Framework