The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Evidence & Policy Pub Date : 2023-09-14 DOI:10.1332/17442648y2023d000000001
Jan Lecouturier, Ivo Vlaev, Paul Chadwick, Angel M. Chater, Michael P. Kelly, Louis Goffe, Carly Meyer, Mei Yee Tang, Vivi Antonopoulou, Fiona Graham, Falko F. Sniehotta
{"title":"The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units","authors":"Jan Lecouturier, Ivo Vlaev, Paul Chadwick, Angel M. Chater, Michael P. Kelly, Louis Goffe, Carly Meyer, Mei Yee Tang, Vivi Antonopoulou, Fiona Graham, Falko F. Sniehotta","doi":"10.1332/17442648y2023d000000001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: There has been a rapid increase in the number of, and demand for, organisations offering behavioural science advice to government over the last ten years. Yet we know little of the state of science and the experiences of these evidence providers. Aims and objectives: To identify current practice in this emerging field and the factors that impact on the production of high-quality and policy-relevant research. Methods: A qualitative study using one-to-one interviews with representatives from a purposeful sample of 15 units in the vanguard of international behavioural science research in policy. The data were analysed thematically. Findings: Relationships with policymakers were important in the inception of units, research conduct, implementation and dissemination of findings. Knowledge exchange facilitated a shared understanding of policy issues/context, and of behavioural science. Sufficient funding was crucial to maintain critical capacity in the units’ workforces, build a research portfolio beneficial to policymakers and the units, and to ensure full and transparent dissemination. Discussion and conclusion: Findings highlight the positive impact of strong evidence-provider/user relationships and the importance of governments’ commitment to co-produced research programmes to address policy problems and transparency in the dissemination of methods and findings. From the findings we have created a framework, ‘STEPS’ (Sharing, Transparency, Engagement, Partnership, Strong relationships), of five recommendations for units working with policymakers. These findings will be of value to all researchers conducting research on behalf of government.","PeriodicalId":51652,"journal":{"name":"Evidence & Policy","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/17442648y2023d000000001","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: There has been a rapid increase in the number of, and demand for, organisations offering behavioural science advice to government over the last ten years. Yet we know little of the state of science and the experiences of these evidence providers. Aims and objectives: To identify current practice in this emerging field and the factors that impact on the production of high-quality and policy-relevant research. Methods: A qualitative study using one-to-one interviews with representatives from a purposeful sample of 15 units in the vanguard of international behavioural science research in policy. The data were analysed thematically. Findings: Relationships with policymakers were important in the inception of units, research conduct, implementation and dissemination of findings. Knowledge exchange facilitated a shared understanding of policy issues/context, and of behavioural science. Sufficient funding was crucial to maintain critical capacity in the units’ workforces, build a research portfolio beneficial to policymakers and the units, and to ensure full and transparent dissemination. Discussion and conclusion: Findings highlight the positive impact of strong evidence-provider/user relationships and the importance of governments’ commitment to co-produced research programmes to address policy problems and transparency in the dissemination of methods and findings. From the findings we have created a framework, ‘STEPS’ (Sharing, Transparency, Engagement, Partnership, Strong relationships), of five recommendations for units working with policymakers. These findings will be of value to all researchers conducting research on behalf of government.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
产生高质量和政策相关研究的关键因素:来自国际行为科学单位的见解
背景:在过去的十年里,为政府提供行为科学建议的组织的数量和需求都在迅速增加。然而,我们对科学状况和这些证据提供者的经验知之甚少。目的和目标:确定这一新兴领域的当前实践,以及影响高质量和政策相关研究成果的因素。方法:一项定性研究,采用一对一访谈的方式,与15个单位的有目的样本的代表进行访谈,这些单位是国际政策行为科学研究的先锋。对数据进行了专题分析。研究结果:与决策者的关系在单位的建立、研究行为、实施和研究结果的传播中都很重要。知识交流促进了对政策问题/背景和行为科学的共同理解。足够的资金对于维持这些单位的工作人员的关键能力、建立有利于决策者和这些单位的研究组合以及确保充分和透明的传播至关重要。讨论和结论:调查结果强调了强有力的证据提供者/使用者关系的积极影响,以及政府承诺共同制定研究方案以解决政策问题和传播方法和调查结果的透明度的重要性。根据调查结果,我们创建了一个“STEPS”框架(共享、透明、参与、伙伴关系、牢固关系),为与政策制定者合作的单位提供了五项建议。这些发现对所有代表政府进行研究的研究人员都很有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Evidence & Policy
Evidence & Policy SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
53
期刊最新文献
Breaking the Overton Window: on the need for adversarial co-production Examining research systems and models for local government: a systematic review Experiences and perceptions of evidence use among senior health service decision makers in Ireland: a qualitative study The critical factors in producing high quality and policy-relevant research: insights from international behavioural science units Understanding brokers, intermediaries, and boundary spanners: a multi-sectoral review of strategies, skills, and outcomes
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1