“Hearing from all sides” how legislative testimony influences state level policy-makers in the United States

International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 91-98

  Moreland Russell, Sarah ^a   Barbero, Colleen ^a   Andersen, Stephanie ^a   Geary, Nora ^a   Dodson, Elizabeth A ^a   Brownson, Ross C ^a,b  

^a WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY IN ST LOUIS   (United States)

^b Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

Legislators; Policy making; Testimony

Indexed keywords

EID: 85002396901     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23225939     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.15171/ijhpm.2015.13     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Weiss C. The many meanings of research utilization. Public Adm Rev 1979; 39: 426-31.
2. Kingdon J. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. New York: Longman; 2003.
3. Mays N, Pope C, Popay J. Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health field. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005; 10: 6-20. doi: 10.1258/1355819054308576
4. van Kammen J, de Savigny D, Sewankambo N. Using knowledge brokering to promote evidence-based policy-making: the need for support structures. Bull World Health Org Suppl 2006; 84: 608-12. doi: 10.1590/S0042-96862006000800011
5. Sanderson I. Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy making. Public Adm 2002; 80: 1-22. doi: 10.1111/1467-9299.00292
6. Cohen M, March J, Olsen J. A garbage can model of organizational choice. Adm Sci Q 1972; 17: 1-25. doi: 10.2307/2392088
7. Bundgaard U, Vrangbæk K. Reform by coincidence? explaining the policy process of structural reform in Denmark. Scan Polit Stud 2007; 30: 491-520. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00190.x
8. Lavis JN. A political science perspective on evidence-based decision-making. In: Lemieux-Charles L, Champagne F, editors. Using knowledge and evidence in health care: multidisciplinary perspectives. Toronto: University of Toronto Press; 2004. p. 70-85.
9. Whiteman D. Communication in Congress: Members, Staff, and the Search for Information. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas; 1995.
10. Schlozman KL, Tierney JT. Organized Interests and American Democracy: New York: Harper & Row; 1986.
11. Baumgartner F, Leech B. Basic Interests: The Importance of Interest Groups in Political Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1998.
12. Nownes A, Freeman P. Interest group activity in the states. J Polit 1998; 60: 86-112. doi: 10.2307/2648002
13. Apollonio D, Bero L. Evidence and argument in policymaking: development of workplace smoking legislation. BMC Public Health 2009; 9. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-189
14. Bero L, Montini T, Bryan-Jones K, Mangurian C. Science in regulatory policy making: case studies in the development of workplace smoking restrictions. Tob Control 2001; 10: 329-36. doi: 10.1136/tc.10.4.329
15. Kasniunas NT. Impact of interest group testimony on lawmaking in Congress [master’s thesis]. Chicago (IL): Loyola University of Chicago; 2009. p. 247.
16. Apollonio DE, Lopipero P, Bero LA. Participation and argument in legislative debate on smoking restrictions. Health Res Policy Syst 2007; 5: 1-36. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-5-12
17. Diermeier D, Feddersen T. Information and congressional hearings. Am J Pol Sci 2000; 44: 51-65. doi: 10.2307/2669292
18. Smith RA. Interest group influence in the US Congress. Legislative Studies Quarterly 1995; 20: 89-139.
19. Bogenschneider K, Corbett T. Evidence-Based Policymaking. New York: Routledge; 2010.
20. Albert M, Fretheim A, Maïga D. Factors influencing the utilization of research findings by health policy-makers in a developing country: the selection of Mali’s essential medicines. Health Res Policy Syst 2007; 5. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-5-2
21. Innvær S, Vist G, Trommald M, Oxman A. Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review. J Health Serv Res Policy 2002; 7: 239-44. doi: 10.1258/135581902320432778
22. Edwards H, Bryant D, Bent-Goodley T. Participation and influence in federal child welfare policymaking. J Public Child Welf 2011; 5: 145-66. doi: 10.1080/15548732.2011.566750
23. Larsen J, Vrangbæk K, Traulsen J. Advocacy coalitions and pharmacy policy in Denmark: solid cores with fuzzy edges. Soc Sci Med 2006; 63: 212-24. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.045
24. Sorian R, Baugh T. Power of information: closing the gap between research and policy. Health Aff 2002; 21: 264-73. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.21.2.264
25. Montini T, Bero LA. Policy makers’ perspectives on tobacco control advocates’ roles in regulation development. Tob Control 2001; 10: 218-24. doi: 10.1136/tc.10.3.218
26. National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). Legislator Data [Internet]. Washington DC: National Conference of State Legislatures; 2013. [cited 2014 Aug 22]. Available from: http:// www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/legislator-data. aspx
27. Rütten A. Evidence-based policy revisited: orientation towards the policy process and a public health policy science. Int J Public Health 2012; 57: 455-7. doi: 10.1007/s00038-011-0321-1
28. Van Egmond S, Bekker M, Bal R, van der Grinten T. Connecting evidence and policy: bringing researchers and policy makers together for effective evidence-based health policy in the Netherlands: a case study. Evid Policy 2011; 7: 25-39. doi: 10.1332/174426411X552981
29. Lupia A. Communicating science in politicized environments. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013; 110: 14048-54. doi: 10.1073/ pnas.1212726110