Debate: Co-production can contribute to research impact in the social sciences

2010 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 208-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fiona Armstrong ◽  
Adrian Alsop
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
The Social

scholarly journals We Need to Talk about Impact: Why Social Policy Academics need to Engage with the UK's Research Impact Agenda

2016 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
KATHERINE E. SMITH ◽  
ELLEN STEWART
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Health Inequalities ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Policy Response ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Policy Relevance ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Way

AbstractOf all the social sciences, social policy is one of the most obviously policy-orientated. One might, therefore, expect a research and funding agenda which prioritises and rewards policy relevance to garner an enthusiastic response among social policy scholars. Yet, the social policy response to the way in which major funders and the Research Excellence Framework (REF) are now prioritising ‘impact’ has been remarkably muted. Elsewhere in the social sciences, ‘research impact’ is being widely debated and a wealth of concerns about the way in which this agenda is being pursued are being articulated. Here, we argue there is an urgent need for social policy academics to join this debate. First, we employ interviews with academics involved in health inequalities research, undertaken between 2004 and 2015, to explore perceptions, and experiences, of the ‘impact agenda’ (an analysis which is informed by a review of guidelines for assessing ‘impact’ and relevant academic literature). Next, we analyse high- and low-scoring REF2014 impact case studies to assess whether these concerns appear justified. We conclude by outlining how social policy expertise might usefully contribute to efforts to encourage, measure and reward research ‘impact’.

Methods for mapping the impact of social sciences and humanities—A literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Budtz Pedersen ◽  
Jonas Følsgaard Grønvad ◽  
Rolf Hvidtfeldt
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Funding Agencies ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Impact

Abstract This article explores the current literature on ‘research impact’ in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). By providing a comprehensive review of available literature, drawing on national and international experiences, we take a systematic look at the impact agenda within SSH. The primary objective of this article is to examine key methodological components used to assess research impact comparing the advantages and disadvantages of each method. The study finds that research impact is a highly complex and contested concept in the SSH literature. Drawing on the strong methodological pluralism emerging in the literature, we conclude that there is considerable room for researchers, universities, and funding agencies to establish impact assessment tools directed towards specific missions while avoiding catch-all indicators and universal metrics.

Quantifying the research impact of the Sustainable Forest Management Network in the social sciences: a bibliometric study

2010 ◽  
Vol 40 (11) ◽  
pp. 2248-2255 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole L. Klenk ◽  
Anna Dabros ◽  
Gordon M. Hickey
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Forest Management ◽  
Sustainable Forest Management ◽  
Research Output ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Funded Research ◽  
Principal Investigators ◽  
The Social ◽  
Research Standards ◽  
The Impact

This research note presents the results of a bibliometric analysis that was conducted to better understand the impact that Sustainable Forest Management Network (SFMN) funded research had in the forest-related social and Aboriginal research communities. We applied two indicators of research impact: (i) research outputs and (ii) citations. Our results suggest that the SFMN’s research outputs were highest in the fields of economics, sociology, and political science and law. The number of research articles that acknowledged the SFMN was 30% of the total research output of the SFMN-funded Principal Investigators. These articles represented 3% of the social science articles published in the Forestry Chronicle (the journal most frequently used by SFMN-funded Principal Investigators). Research output related to Aboriginal forestry indicated that the SFMN had a significant influence on the development of the field. Our citation analysis indicated that the average number of citations per SFMN-acknowledged publication in the social sciences was approximately the same as the international impact standard in the field. These results suggest that the SFMN-funded research in the social sciences compared very well with the international research standards in forest-related social sciences.

Towards measuring societal impact of research: Insights from an Irish case study

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Finbarr Brereton ◽  
Eoin O'Neill ◽  
Louise Dunne
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Funding Agency ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Societal Impact ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Horizon 2020 ◽  
The Social

Academic research is increasingly required to demonstrate economic and policy relevance, with this becoming a key metric by which the success of research projects are being judged. Furthermore, the active, as opposed to passive, participation of citizens in science is now encouraged through dissemination and outreach, using, for example, co-production techniques. These non-traditional academic impacts have become a key component of a number of funding agency calls, most notably the European Union’s research funding programme Horizon 2020. However, exactly how measurable these ‘impacts’ are, particularly social and policy impacts, is unclear as there is not an obvious metric. Additionally, there is no standardised approach to assessing research impact recognised in the social sciences. Using a case study which describes the experience of using public engagement seminars as a means to disseminate academic research to stakeholder communities, this article aims to develop an impact assessment strategy to measure societal impact applicable in the social sciences. Based on recommendations in the UK Research Excellence Framework, amongst other literature, we put forward three steps to better capture research ‘impact’ in a more meaningful way in future research projects: (i) establish the quality of the academic research, (ii) choose appropriate discipline-specific criteria for measuring societal impact and (iii) choose appropriate measurable indicators. Other useful insights include the difficulty of motivating public interest in topics that are no longer high profile or emotive, and hence the necessity to provide access to research findings as early as possible in the research cycle. The article concludes with a discussion of the difficulties of measuring ‘impact’ in a meaningful sense.

scholarly journals Dialnet Métricas como herramienta de evaluación bibliométrica: aportes al análisis de la actividad científica en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orlando Gregorio-Chaviano ◽  
Rafael Repiso ◽  
Antonio Calderón-Rehecho ◽  
Joaquín León-Marín ◽  
Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Wide Debate ◽  
Eugene Garfield ◽  
Spanish Universities ◽  
The Impact

Within the current panorama of science evaluation, the limitations of citation indexes to study the social sciences and humanities have been the subject of wide debate. To resolve this situation, different products have been created for use in national contexts, since they cover certain aspects not contained in more international indices. An example is the In-RECS family, where an indicator such as the impact factor of Eugene Garfield is defined, but its contribution lies in the ability to evaluate research in Spain by obtaining citation indicators. This paper thus highlights the need to create new products for research evaluation in general, but particularly in the social sciences and humanities. The context in which different alternatives arise and are developed to evaluate existing journals is presented, along with Dialnet Metrics, a citation index developed by the Dialnet Foundation in collaboration with the EC3 Group and dozens of Spanish universities. Based on an analysis of the citations of source journals from different subject areas, Dialnet Metrics provides indicators to evaluate the research impact at different levels. This bibliometric product enables contextualized analysis at the micro (researchers), meso (journals), and macro (areas and universities) levels. Finally, the content, data volumes, and structure of this citation index are described quantitatively. Resumen Dentro del panorama actual de evaluación de la ciencia, las limitaciones de los índices de citación para estudiar las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades han sido motivo de amplio debate. Para resolver esta situación, se han creado distintos productos para ser usados en contextos nacionales, dado que cubren ciertos aspectos no presentes en los índices de carácter más internacional. Como ejemplo se encuentran los de la familia In-RECS, donde se define un indicador similar al factor de impacto de Eugene Garfield, pero su aporte radica en la capacidad de evaluar la investigación en España mediante la obtención de indicadores de citas. Es por ello por lo que en este trabajo se expone la necesidad de crear nuevos productos para la evaluación de la investigación en general, pero particularizando en las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades. Se muestra el contexto en el que surgen y se desarrollan las distintas alternativas de evaluación de revistas existentes y se presenta Dialnet Métricas. Este es un índice de citación realizado por la Fundación Dialnet en colaboración con el Grupo EC3 y decenas de universidades españolas. A partir del análisis de las referencias citadas de revistas fuente de distintos campos temáticos, Dialnet Métricas proporciona indicadores para evaluar el impacto de la investigación a varios niveles. Este producto bibliométrico posibilita el análisis contextualizado a nivel micro (investigadores), meso (revistas) y macro (áreas y universidades). Por último, se describen cuantitativamente los contenidos, volúmenes de datos y estructura de este índice de citas. Palabras clave

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document