title: How do research psychiatrists rate? Views of neuroscientists.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of the paper is to define views of neuroscientists about research psychiatrists that might be restricting collaborative research.
  
  
  METHODS
  A questionnaire was distributed to all members of the Australian Neuroscience Society. Forty-nine questionnaires were returned, and both quantitative and qualitative analyses undertaken.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Neuroscientists rated research psychiatrists as "poor scientists" in having limited scientific training, being loose methodologists and in tending to cut corners, but also viewed research psychiatrists as addressing domains that generate harder research questions. Several factors inhibiting and promoting collaboration between neuroscientists and research psychiatrists were elicited.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  If collaborative links involving neuroscientists and research psychiatrists are to be enhanced, research psychiatrists will need to address and redress views about perceived limitations of their scientific competence.
authors.affiliation: School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales.
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Parker
mesh_terms: D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D001315:Australia; D002983:Clinical Competence; D006801:Humans; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D009488:Neurosciences / Q000639:trends*; D011570:Psychiatry / Q000639:trends*; D012106:Research