confident with their knowledge of research design (n=31; 72.1%), quantitative methods (n=24; 55.8%) and statistical analysis (n=33; 76.8%), and rated their degree of theoretical knowledge to be low or none. On the question of their self-perceived practical research competencies (Table 3) the participants rated their top three competencies as: to develop a research question (n=29; 67.4%), to get an idea for a research project (n=28; 65.1%) and to appraise quality of papers in Danish (n=24; 55.8%) to a high or some degree. The three practical research competencies rated lowest by the participants were writing a scientific paper (n=36; 83.7%), writing a professional paper (n=32; 74.4%) and using statistical analysis (n=28; 65.1%). PLEASE INSERT TABLE 3 ABOUT HERE Interest in nursing research Three-quarters of the participants were interested in nursing research on different levels, as listed in Table 4. PLEASE INSERT TABLE 4 ABOUT HERE 35 participants (81.4%) expressed a high or medium interest in nursing research, 35 participants (81.4%) expressed a high or medium interest in improving their research knowledge and competencies, and 33 participants (76.8%) expressed the opinion that research should be a central part of their daily work. The participants showed interest in participating in research studies in the department (n=31; 72.1%). 8 participants (18.6%) were currently involved in research projects related to decreasing waiting time in out-patient facilities, decreasing medication-related adverse events, increase understanding of compartment syndrome, and topics related to information and communication with patients. 19 participants (44.2%) were interested in kick-starting new nursing research studies concerning, for example, patient empowerment in caring for leg wounds, amputees’ experience with rehabilitation, testing the pre-operative nausea and pain medication, and improving care to orthopaedic trauma patients. The participants emphasized studies with relevance for improvement of patient care and treatment. Motivation to increase research knowledge and competencies 32 participants (74%) indicated motivation to actively increase their theoretical knowledge and practical research competencies. The variables are listed in Tables 2 and 3 respectively. The participants were mostly interested in increasing their knowledge on research design (n=26; 60.5%) and statistical analysis (n=26; 60.5). However, approximately half of the participants wanted to increase their knowledge on methodology (n=23, 53.5%), qualitative- (n=25, 58.1%), and quantitative (n=21; 48.8%) methods. In accordance with their motivation to improve their practical research competencies, over half of the participants wanted to learn how to design (n=28; 65.1%) and conduct a research project (n=28; 65.1%). The participants were also motivated to improve their competencies in using statistical analysis (n=24; 55.8%) and to develop research questions (n=24; 55.8%), even though they already perceived themselves as having a high degree of competence in the latter. The three most important motivational factors to increase research knowledge and competencies were inner motivation (62.8%), support from the head section nurse (60.5%) and support from colleagues (53.5%). Clinical guidance (44.2%) and having a role model (37.2%) were still considered important. One participant reported the importance of the research topics’ relevance in daily clinical practice as a motivational factor. The participants’ motivational factors are depicted in Figure 1. PLEASE INSERT FIGURE 1 ABOUT HERE Personal and contextual barriers The participants were asked about their personal and contextual barriers against their motivation to increase their knowledge and competencies. The personal barriers were defined as the limitations the participants experienced from within themselves (Figure 2). PLEASE INSERT FIGURE 2 ABOUT HERE The most important personal barrier was lack of time (23.3%) in prioritizing research in the working day, experienced by one-quarter of the participants. Second were lack of interest (16.3%) and self-perceived lack of abilities (13.9%). The ratings showed how the participants experienced a low level