Networks and evidence-based advocacy: influencing a policy subsystem

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-659
Author(s):  
Naomi Nichols ◽  
Jayne Malenfant ◽  
Kaitlin Schwan
Keyword(s):  
Policy Change ◽  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Strategic Communication ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Relational Work ◽  
Engagement Strategies ◽  
Timely Access ◽  
Intermediary Organisations

Background: Timely access to relevant and trustworthy research findings is an important facilitator of research use. But the relational aspects of evidence generation, mobilisation and use have been insufficiently explored.Aims and objectives: Our aim is to describe the strategic communicative and relational work of two intermediary organisations playing thought leadership roles within a large, heterogeneous and loosely configured network comprised of individuals and organisations from the following sectors: academia, frontline service delivery, philanthropic funding, advocacy organisations and government.Methods: The data for this project were generated as part of a study of the ways social science research influences policy, practice and systems-change processes. Proceeding from the standpoints of people who generate and/or engage with research in an effort to address homelessness in Canada, this article focuses on the intersections of research, strategic communication and policy making.Findings: Our findings suggest that strategic communication and knowledge exchange play integral roles in efforts to create evidence-based policy change. These communicative activities take the form of public-facing political and/or media engagement strategies, traditional knowledge mobilisation activities and continuous informal and timely exchanges of information between trusted allies.Discussion and conclusions: Our study reveals the importance of a heterogeneous network structure, with formal and informal alliances between individuals and organisations, as well as key intermediary organisations through which knowledge can be strategically mobilised within the network to serve policy change aims. Furthermore, our study suggests that interest in evidence-led governance is shifting the boundaries between research, advocacy and government action.

scholarly journals Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM): Why and How to Connect Researchers and Practitioners

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Seth Levine
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Organizational Diversity ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Impact ◽  
New Evidence

ABSTRACTResearchers and practitioners increasingly want to learn from one another and work together to solve problems. This article presents results from a new evidence-based approach for connecting them, called Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM). This method leverages research on organizational diversity to initiate new relationships between diverse people. The article describes the method and presents data from 37 new connections between practitioners working at nonprofits and social scientists. To my knowledge, this is the first dataset describing reasons why a large variety of nonprofit practitioners value social science research. I also document the impact of these matches. Overall, this article provides actionable guidance for those who want to initiate their own new connections (i.e., match themselves) and/or to broker new connections between others.

Toward an “Age of Imposed Use”? Evidence-Based Crime Policy in a Law and Social Science Context

2017 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 280-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven N. Zane ◽  
Brandon C. Welsh
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Research Utilization ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Evaluation Research ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Crime Policy

Central to the evidence-based paradigm is the explicit goal to increase the influence of scientific research on public policy. The research utilization literature delineates a number of ways that evaluation research can exert an influence on policy decisions, including conceptual, instrumental, and political. Limitations of these routes of research influence on policy and a growing interest in the evidence-based paradigm have given rise to “imposed use,” first coined by Carol Weiss. To better understand the potential promise of imposed use, this review article explores the role of social science research in a law and policy context. Legal reasoning differs from scientific reasoning in important ways, illustrating that law is part of a normative context in which scientific evidence presents one consideration among many. This context helps frame how imposed use can play a role in advancing evidence-based crime policy. Consistent with Weiss’s reflections on imposed use, it also suggests important limitations for doing so.

Introduction: Themed Section on Evidence-Based Policy as a concept for Modernising Governance and Social Science Research

2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam E David
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Social ◽  
Technological Developments

The concept of evidence-based policy and practice has many origins but its relation to the growth of the social sciences is arguably the most important. The uses of the social sciences for both understanding and transforming social policies and political systems has come to be assumed – complex and problematic though these may be. The concept is also closely linked with the concepts of globalisation, technological developments, and the ‘knowledge economy’. Thus the notions of ‘evidence’ and social science research have often been elided with political movements for social and economic change. In other contexts, these notions have been contextualised, so that ‘evidence’ and research are not deemed to be the same. Indeed, it is possible to argue that the notion of legal ‘evidence’ illustrates just how ideological it can be, how it can be used to marshal particular arguments and sustain a specific case rather than present it in a dispassionate manner.

scholarly journals Collaborative Training in Research Methodology: a case of Malaysia and Laos

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-84
Author(s):  
Wah Yun Low ◽  
Aliyyah Nuha Faiqah Azman Firdaus ◽  
Azirah Hashim ◽  
Bouasavanh Keovilay ◽  
Vong Deuan Osay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Methodology ◽  
Regional Integration ◽  
English Language ◽  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
National Development ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Inclusive Development ◽  
Education And Health ◽  
Asean Countries

One important aspect of the ASEAN vision is that ASEAN countries strive for equitable economic development and therefore concerted efforts must be made to narrow the development gap between ASEAN countries. This is prioritised in the Initiative for ASEAN Integration which outlines several activities that are designed to assist CLMV countries achieve deeper regional integration while supporting national development priorities and inclusive development. While there has been improvement, there is still significant variance in development achievements. The gaps are wide not only in achievements in income but also in education and health outcomes. This case study provides a description of a Malaysian and Lao collaboration in English language and research methodology training and the challenges faced in doing social science research among Lao academics. The collaboration addresses the developmental divide through knowledge exchange, engagement and collaboration, and capacity building in development between the parties involved.

A survey of IPV Perpetrator Treatment Providers: Ready for Evidence-Based Practice?

Partner Abuse ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 387-414
Author(s):  
John Hamel ◽  
Clare Cannon ◽  
Fred Buttell ◽  
Regardt Ferreira
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Mental Health Professionals ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Treatment Providers ◽  
Frontline Treatment ◽  
Process Factors

A debate persists regarding the effectiveness of batterer intervention programs (BIPs), the predominant form of intervention for individuals who have perpetrated intimate partner violence (IPV). Social science research has identified some promising research trends—for example, the effectiveness of motivational interviewing and process factors that maintain an effective therapist–client alliance, what clients say facilitators can do to keep them engaged and motivated, and, for certain low-risk populations, the viability of couples counseling. Unfortunately, most frontline treatment providers lack access to much of this research, which appears primarily in peer-reviewed journals. A previous national survey of BIPs reported that, on the whole, BIP group facilitators have ample clinical experience, but are poorly informed about IPV risk factors and dynamics; and while they report substantial training, the nature of that training, and the extent to which the training accurately reflects current research, remains unknown. BIPs, and most treatment providers, including licensed mental health professionals, depend on organizations who too often lack reliable, up-to-date information about domestic violence. The Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Providers (ADVIP) was created by the first author to provide a platform where researchers and providers could cooperate by exchanging information and resources. This article reports on findings from a larger follow-up to the 2016 survey, that sought to elicit views on how to increase cooperation between domestic violence scholars and treatment providers and advance evidence-based practice, and to gauge the role of ADVIP in this effort.

An evidence-based faculty recruitment workshop influences departmental hiring practice perceptions among university faculty

2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-210
Author(s):  
Denise Sekaquaptewa ◽  
Koji Takahashi ◽  
Janet Malley ◽  
Keith Herzog ◽  
Sara Bliss
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Faculty Attitudes ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Faculty Recruitment ◽  
Faculty Diversity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Impact

PurposeMany university programs seek to promote faculty diversity by reducing biases in hiring processes. The purpose of this paper is to conduct two studies to test the individual- and department-level impact of a faculty recruitment workshop (FRW) on faculty attitudes toward evidence-based, equitable hiring practices.Design/methodology/approachStudy 1 included 1,188 faculty who had or had not attended an FRW. Respondents were surveyed about their attitudes and their intentions to use specific equitable search practices. The authors assessed the proportion of faculty in each department to test for the impact of department-level workshop attendance on individual faculty attitudes. Study 2 employed a similar design (with 468 faculty) and tested whether effects of workshop attendance are explained by changes in beliefs about social science research.FindingsFaculty had more favorable attitudes toward equitable search strategies if they had attended a workshop or if they were in a department where more of their colleagues had. Workshop attendance also increased intentions to act on two of three recommendations measured, and led to greater belief in evidence-based descriptions of gender biases. Some evidence suggested that these beliefs mediated the influence of the FRW on attitudes.Research limitations/implicationsBecause faculty were not randomly assigned to attend the workshop, no strong claims about causality are made.Practical implicationsThe present studies demonstrate that an evidence-based recruitment workshop can lead faculty to adopt more favorable attitudes toward strategies that promote gender diversity in hiring.Originality/valueThese studies provide evidence of the role of belief in social science research evidence in explaining the effectiveness of a program designed to increase faculty diversity.

scholarly journals How can we capture the subject’s perspective? An evidence-based approach for the social scientist

2011 ◽  
Vol 50 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 607-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saadi Lahlou
Keyword(s):  
Subjective Experience ◽  
Social Scientist ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Psychological State ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
First Person ◽  
Natural Environments ◽  
External Observer ◽  
The Social

This paper addresses the methodological gap that impedes the collection of empirical data on subjective experience. It describes a new family of methods for social science research (Subjective Evidence-Based Ethnography: SEBE). The methods are based on: first-person audio-visual recording with a miniature video-camera worn at eye-level (‘subcam’); confronting subjects with these first-person recordings to collect their subjective experience; formulating the findings and discussing the final interpretation with the subjects. These procedures enable subjects to reconstruct and describe their psychological state at the moment of action, especially their goals, by reviewing films of their own activity recorded from their own perspective with subcams. These films provide situated records of actual activity in natural environments, without the need of an external observer. This approach, by providing both detailed records of actual activity and evidence-based accounts of the subject’s own mental processes, supports grounded progress in ethnography, psychology, ergonomics, sociology and the social sciences in general. There are also applications for training and cross-cultural contacts. The techniques are described in sufficient detail for the reader to make use of them. Examples of applications are provided and limitations are discussed.

scholarly journals Sport and Social Inclusion: Evidence-Based Policy and Practice

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fred Coalter
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Relevant Research ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
The Social ◽  
On Line

This commentary reflects on my experience of compiling the <em>Value of Sport Monitor</em>—an on-line resource of policy-relevant, research on the social impacts of sport—for eight years. The commentary critically evaluates the assumption of the <em>Value of Sport Monitor</em> that social science research in sport is cumulative and it explores sports interest groups’ varying attitudes to the nature of evidence. It illustrates that widespread conceptual and methodological inconsistencies and weaknesses in research greatly reduce the ability to identify best practice and ‘best buys’ as a basis for policy. The commentary concludes by proposing that a way forward for research to contribute to policy and practice is via theory-based evaluation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document