Hansson and Polk (2018, Research Evaluation, 27/2: 132–44) aim to assess the usefulness of the concepts of relevance, credibility, and legitimacy for understanding the link between process and impact in transdisciplinary (TD) research. However, the article misrepresents some of the ideas in the two main reference articles. It also uses definitions of the concepts it aims to test that are inconsistent with the definitions offered by the reference papers. The methods description is insufficient to know what data were collected or how they were analyzed. More importantly, the effort to understand relationships between process and impact in TD research needs more careful definitions of the concepts outcome and impact as well as more objective ways to assess outcomes and impacts. This letter discusses shortcomings in the article and makes suggestions to improve conceptual clarity and methods for empirically assessing TD research effectiveness.

中文翻译：

---

对Hansson和Polk（2018）的回应“评估跨学科研究的影响：相关性，可信度和合法性对于理解过程与影响之间的联系的有用性”

Hansson和Polk（2018，Research Evaluation，27/2：132-44）旨在评估相关性，可信度和合法性概念对于理解跨学科（TD）研究中过程与影响之间的联系的有用性。但是，该文章在两个主要参考文章中歪曲了一些想法。它还使用了旨在测试的概念的定义，这些定义与参考文件提供的定义不一致。方法描述不足以知道收集了什么数据或如何分析了这些数据。更重要的是，要在TD研究中理解过程与影响之间的关系，需要对概念的结果和影响进行更仔细的定义，并需要更客观的方法来评估结果和影响。