The Contextual Mindset of Worlds 1, 2 and 3 as Constructs in Scientific Knowledge Processing during Research Activities

Real and imaginary boundaries of reality affect the contexts pertaining to the processing of knowledge. This study review examines how the integration of Worlds 1, 2, and 3 as constructs serves as a framework for analyzing the advancement of knowledge through research initiatives. In this regard, the empirical context and the physical environment where data is collected represent World 1, while the scientific and epistemic advancement of knowledge is World 2. Critical thought and metascience combined make World 3. This study review focused on how Worlds 1, 2, and 3 inspire a growth mindset toward constructive synergy, and an interdisciplinary approach to understanding the interplay between global and local levels of research. Each world holds significance, but only through their possible integration can a coherent and systematic approach to scientific research be achieved. The study review conducted analyzed literature on the constructs of Worlds 1, 2, and 3 from various disciplines that include social sciences, healthcare, and education. The focus was on the functions of collecting empirical data (World 1); analyzing data and developing conceptual frameworks, and theories (World 2); and meta-reflective and scientific self-evaluation (World 3). It also analyzed how adopting a growth versus a fixed mindset, the blending of global and local contexts, and the role of teamwork from different professions in dealing with advanced multifaceted research problems and projects influenced innovation in research. The findings of the study were noteworthy. The first finding was that World 1 focuses on activities that allow for empirical data collection in areas such as healthcare and education. The second finding was that World 2 incorporates empirical evidence into developing and analyzing scientific theories within a framework of systematic construction and analysis. The third finding was that World 3 encourages critical reflection that underpins the validity and usefulness of the research. The fourth finding was that a developed mindset fostered creativity, perseverance, and interdisciplinary collaboration, while a fixed mindset inhibited innovation and creativity. The last finding was essential in that the connection formed between global and local contexts enhanced the purpose of the research, while interprofessional approaches enabled holistic solutions to the problems. The study review demonstrates that fixed-mindset researchers do not necessarily embrace change, and are possibly averse to failure in examination. This review recommends employing an empirical, methodological, and self-reflective framework for conducting thorough research and in-depth intellectual inquiry. Further research is required on the application of the integrated constructs from Worlds 1, 2, and 3 in other fields, particularly in virtual and digital research contexts. This review promotes the use of thoughtful approaches to context-focused reasoning to enhance science rigorously, and address pressing contemporary issues within ecosystems in a critically reflective manner.