Research Utilization in the Social Sciences: A Comparison of Five Academic Disciplines in Australia

Science Communication

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 780-809

  Cherney, Adrian ^a   Head, Brian ^a   Boreham, Paul ^a   Povey, Jenny ^a   Ferguson, Michele ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

Author keywords

information acquisition; interdisciplinary science communication; knowledge exchange; quantitative analysis; research utilization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887506616     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547013491398     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Measuring the impact of publicly funded research. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training; 2005:.
2. Amara N.,Ouimet M.,Landry R.New evidence on instrumental, conceptual, and symbolic utilization of university research in government agencies.Science Communication. 2004;26:75-106.
3. AtranS. (2013, March15). Social warfare [Foreign Policy web blog]. Retrieved from http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/03/15/social_warfare_budget_republicans.
4. Bammer G.Enhancing research collaborations: Three key management challenges.Research Policy. 2008;37:875-887.
5. BanksG. (2011, July14). Economics, economists and public policy in Australia (Opening address at the 40th Australian Conference of Economists Symposium, "Does Australian Public Policy Get the Economics It Deserves?"). Retrieved from http://www.pc.gov.au/speeches/gary-banks/economics.
6. Belkhodja O.Toward a revisited organizational and social perspective of knowledge utilization: Contributions from organizational theory.International Journal of Knowledge, Culture & Change Management. 2012;11 (3): 39-58.
7. Belkhodja O.,Amara N.,Landry R.,Ouimet M.The extent and organizational determinants of research utilization in Canadian health services organizations.Science Communication. 2007;28:377-417.
8. Bogenschneider K.,Corbett T. J.Evidence-based policy making: Insights from policy minded researchers and research-minded policymakers. New York, NY: Routledge; 2010:.
9. Boyd R. D.,Menlo A.Solving problems of practice in education: A prescriptive model for the use of scientific information.Science Communication. 1984;6:59-74.
10. Bransford J. D.,Stipek D. J.,Vye N. J.,Goemx L. M.,Lam D.The role of research in educational improvement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press; 2009:.
11. Burkhardt H.,Schoenfeld A. H.Improving educational research: Toward a more useful, more influential, and better funded enterprise.Educational Researcher. 2003;32 (9): 3-14.
12. Caplan N.The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization.American Behavioral Scientist. 1979;22:459-470.
13. Cherney A.,Head B.,Boreham P.,Povey J.,Ferguson M.Perspectives of academic social scientists on knowledge transfer and research collaborations: A cross-sectional survey of Australian academics.Evidence & Policy. 2012;8:433-453.
14. Cherney A.,McGee T. R.Utilization of social science research: Results of a pilot study among Australian sociologists and criminologists.Journal of Sociology. 2011;47:144-162.
15. Cherney A.,Povey J.,Head B.,Boreham P.,Ferguson M.What influences the utilization of educational research by policy-makers and practitioners? The perspectives of academic educational researchers.International Journal of Educational Research. 2012;56:23-34.
16. Contrandriopoulos D.,Lemire M.,Denis J. J.,Tremblay E.Knowledge exchange processes in organizations and policy arenas: A narrative systematic review of the literature.Milbank Quarterly. 2010;88:444-483.
17. The impact of educational research. Canberra, Australia: Author; 2000:.
18. Donovan C.State of the art in assessing research impact: Introduction to a special issue.Research Evaluation. 2011;20:175-179.
19. Dunn W. N.The two communities metaphor and models of knowledge use: An exploratory case study.Science Communication. 1980;1:515-536.
20. Dunn W. N.,Dukes M. J.,Cahill A. G.Designing utilization research.Science Communication. 1984;5:387-404.
21. Elton L.The UK research assessment exercise: Unintended consequences.Higher Education Quarterly. 2000;54:274-283.
22. Science shops: Knowledge for the community. Luxembourg: European Commission; 2003:.
23. Florio E.,Demartini J. R.The use of information by policymakers at the local community level.Science Communication. 1993;15:106-123.
24. Fox K. J.,Milbourne R.What determines research output of academic economists?.Economic Record. 1999;75:256-267.
25. Friedman M. A.,Farag Z. E.Gaps in the dissemination/knowledge utilization base.Science Communication. 1991;12:266-288.
26. Griffin C.,Phoenix A.The relationship between qualitative and quantitative research: Lessons from feminist psychology.Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology. 1994;4:287-298.
27. Haynes A. S.,Derrick G. E.,Chapman S.,Redman S.,Hall W. D.,Gillespie J.,Sturk H.From "our world" to the "real world": Exploring the views and behaviour of policy-influential Australian public health researchers.Social Science & Medicine. 2011;72:1047-1055.
28. HolbrookJ. B. (2012). Re-assessing the science-society relation: The case of the US National Science Foundation's broader impacts merit review criterion (1997-2011). Retrieved from http://www.scienceofsciencepolicy.net/system/files/attachments/Holbrook_BIC_2.0_final.pdf.
29. Huberman M.Linkages between researchers and practitioners: A qualitative study.American Educational Research Journal. 1990;27:363-391.
30. Jacobson N.,Butterill D.,Goering P.Organizational factors that influence university-based researchers' engagement in knowledge transfer activities.Science Communication. 2004;25:246-259.
31. Juhlin M.,Tang P.,Molas-Gallart J.Study of the contribution of social scientists to government policy and practice. London, England: Economic and Social Research Council; 2012:.
32. Kamenetzky J. R.Opportunities for impact: Statistical analysis of the National Science Foundation's broader impacts criterion.Science and Public Policy. 2013;40:72-84.
33. Knott J.,Wildavsky A.If dissemination is the solution, what is the problem?.Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 1980;1:537-578.
34. Kramer D. M.,Wells R. P.Achieving buy-in: Building networks to facilitate knowledge transfer.Science Communication. 2005;26:428-444.
35. LambertR. (2003). Lambert review of Business-university research collaboration: Final report (Report to HM Treasury). Retrieved from http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/lambert_review_final_450.pdf.
36. Landry R.,Amara N.,Lamari M.Climbing the ladder of research utilization: Evidence from social science research.Science Communication. 2001a;22:396-422.
37. Landry R.,Amara N.,Lamari M.Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada.Research Policy. 2001b;30:333-349.
38. Landry R.,Lamari M.,Amara N.The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies.Public Administration Review. 2003;63:192-205.
39. Larson J.Review essay: Knowledge utilization: What is it?.Science Communication. 1980;1:421-442.
40. Lavis J. N,Davis H.,Oxman A.,Debis J. L.,Golden-Biddle K.,Ferlie E.Towards systematic reviews that inform health care management and policy-making.Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2006;10:35-48.
41. Lavis J. N.,Lomas J.,Hamid M.,Sewankambo N. K.Assessing country-level efforts to link research to action.Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2006;84:620-628.
42. Lavis J. N.,Robertson D.,Woodside J. M.,McLeod C. B.,Abelson J.How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision-makers.Milbank Quarterly. 2003;81:221-248.
43. Lester J. P.The utilization of policy analysis by state agency officials.Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization. 1993;14:267-290.
44. Lester J. P.,Wilds L. J.The utilization of public policy analysis: A conceptual framework.Evaluation and Program Planning. 1990;13:313-319.
45. Levin B.Mobilising research knowledge in education.London Review of Education. 2011;9:15-26.
46. Levin B.,Edelstein H.Research, policy and practice in education.Education Canada. 2010;50 (2): 29-30.
47. Lomas J.Using "linkage and exchange" to move research into policy at a Canadian foundation.Health Affairs. 2000;19:236-240.
48. Macintyre S.The poor relation: A history of the social sciences in Australia. Melbourne, Victoria, Australia: Melbourne University Press; 2010:.
49. Martin B. R.The Research Excellence Framework and the "impact agenda": Are we creating a Frankenstein monster.Research Evaluation. 2011;20:247-254.
50. Meagher L.,Lyall C.,Nutley S.Flows of knowledge, expertise and influence: A method for assessing policy and practice impacts from the social science.Research Evaluation. 2008;17:163-173.
51. Mervis J.Peer review: Beyond the data.Science. 2011;334:169-171.
52. Mitton C.,Adair C. E.,McKenzie E.,Patten S. B.,Perry W. B.Knowledge transfer and exchange: Review and synthesis of the literature.Milbank Quarterly. 2007;85:729-768.
53. Nightingale P.,Scott A.Peer review and the relevance gap: Ten suggestions for policy-makers.Science and Public Policy. 2007;34:543-553.
54. Nutley S.,Walter I.,Davies H.Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Bristol, England: Policy Press; 2007:.
55. Oh C. H.,Rich R. F.Explaining use of information in public policymaking.Knowledge and Policy. 1996;9 (1): 3-35.
56. Orr K.,Bennett M.Public administration scholarship and the politics of coproducing academic-practitioner research.Public Administration Review. 2012;72:487-496.
57. Ouimet M.,Landry R.,Ziam S.,Bedard P.The absorption of research knowledge by public civil servants.Evidence & Policy. 2009;5:331-350.
58. Rich R. F.Measuring knowledge utilization: Processes and outcomes.Knowledge and Policy. 1997;10 (3): 11-24.
59. Rich R. F.,Oh C. H.Rationality and use of information in policy decisions: A search for alternatives.Science Communication. 2000;22:173-211.
60. Rickinson M.,Sebba J.,Edwards A.Improving research through user engagement. London, England: Routledge; 2011:.
61. Rogers E. M.Diffusion of innovations. 1983). Diffusion of innovations (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.New York, NY: Free Press; 1983:.
62. Rogers J. M.Social science disciplines and policy research: The case of political science.Policy Studies Review. 1989;9:13-28.
63. RossJ. (2011, March28). Academic research "lost without translation."Campus Review. Retrieved from http://www.campusreview.com.au/blog/2011/03/academic-research-lost-without-translation/.
64. Saha L. J.,Biddle B. J.,Anderson D. S.Attitudes towards educational research knowledge and policy-making among American and Australian school principals.International Journal of Educational Research. 1995;23:113-126.
65. Seidel A. D.Underutilized research: Researchers' and decision makers' concepts of information quality.Science Communication. 1981;3:233-248.
66. Shergold P.Seen but not heard.Australian Literary Review (The Australian Newspaper). 2011;:3-4.
67. Smith S.,Ward V.,House A."Impact" in the proposals for the UK's Research Excellence Framework: Shifting the boundaries of academic autonomy.Research Policy. 2011;40:1369-1379.
68. Sowey E.The value of econometrics to economists in business and government: A study of the state of the discipline.Journal of Applied Mathematics and Decision Sciences. 2002;6:101-127.
69. Sue V. R.Conducting online surveys. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2007:.
70. Vanderlinde R.,van Braak J.The gap between educational research and practice: Views of teachers, school leaders, intermediaries and researchers.British Educational Research Journal. 2010;36:299-316.
71. Weber D. J.Explaining policymakers' use of policy information: The relative importance of the two-community theory versus decision-maker orientation.Science Communication. 1986;7:249-290.
72. Weiss C. H.Knowledge creep and decision accretion.Science Communication. 1980;1:381-404.
73. Weiss C. H.,Bucuvalas M.Social science research and decision-making. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 1980:.
74. Wilkinson H.,Gallagher M.,Smith M.A collaborative approach to defining the usefulness of impact: Lessons from a knowledge exchange project involving academics and social work practitioners.Evidence & Policy. 2012;8:311-327.
75. Wooding S.,Nason E.,Klautzer L.,Rubin J.,Hanney S.,Grant J.Policy and practice impacts of research funded by the Economic and Social Research Council: A case study of the Futures of Work programme, approach and analysis. Cambridge, England: RAND Europe; 2007:.