Desiderata for defining concepts for communication in scientific work

When defining concepts for scientific work, researchers consider various desiderata (desired characteristics) that are derived from higher level meta-desiderata regarding accepted goals of scientific work and how to act towards achieving them. Although these desiderata are often implicit, they significantly impact researchers' processes of defining and selecting concepts, ultimately influencing research outcomes, communication, and knowledge production. We evaluate the selection and application of desiderata for defining cross-disciplinary concepts dependent upon higher level meta-desiderata working from the example that if one believes that science ought to strive for providing systematic knowledge about the world (level 1), and if one believes that the ease of communication will positively affect the process of attaining that kind of knowledge (level 2), then one ought to strive for definitions of concepts that provide as much as possible of the list of features we argue for (level 3). Using psychological concepts as our examples we offer a proposed list of six desiderata: precision, specificity, theory-neutrality, explanation- neutrality, operational ease, folk-level understanding. The goal is to facilitate researchers' consideration of appropriate desiderata and, where their meta-desiderata match the example provided, promote the adoption and utilization of these desiderata in their work. Given the backdrop of conceptual change and conceptual creep, this aspect, though less discussed, plays a crucial role in shaping our research and knowledge production.