• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The American psychologist >Revisiting Theory on Research Use: Turning to Policymakers for Fresh Insights
【24h】

Revisiting Theory on Research Use: Turning to Policymakers for Fresh Insights

机译：重新试论研究用途：转向政策制定者进行新的见解

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Social science has done well in providing empirical studies that depict how research is used in policymaking. Yet it performs less well in another contribution science can make-developing explanatory theoretical frameworks that predict and promote future research use. To address this theoretical void. onsite studies of policymakers have been called for. In this qualitative study, semistructured, face-to-face interviews were conducted with 123 legislators in 2 states, 32 legislators nominated by colleagues as exemplar research users, and 13 key informants. Policymakers' reports of 14 contributions that research makes to policymaking are compared to the predictions of four prominent theories of research utilization, which are representative of four categories of theories that examine the interface between researchers and policymakers-the politico-administrative decision-making model, a typology of research use; community dissonance theory; and policy agenda-setting/multiple-streams theory. The eight research contributions most frequently mentioned by policymakers cut across policymakers, political party, and states with varying degrees of partisan polarization. In some respects, policymakers' perceptions were well-aligned with theory, such as the contributions research makes to individual considerations (e.g., informing, explaining, and justifying one's positions), and to policy issue considerations (e.g., defining issues; designing legislation). Yet other contributions were seldom predicted by theory, such as the contributions research makes to policymakers' relationships (earning the trust of colleagues; educating others) and the policy process (asking important questions; enhancing debate, dialogue, collaboration, and compromise). Policymakers report that these contributions of research provide both policy and political benefits. Implications are drawn for advancing theory on research utilization.
机译：社会科学在提供了描述如何在政策制作中使用的实证研究方面做得很好。然而，它在另一个贡献科学中表现不佳，可以制定制定预测和促进未来研究使用的解释性理论框架。解决这个理论空缺。已呼吁对政策制定者的现场研究。在这种定性研究中，半系统的面对面访谈是在2个州的123个立法者进行，32名立法室被同事提名为示例研究用户，以及13名关键信息人员。政策制定者的报告有14个贡献，这些贡献将研究对政策制定进行了比较，与研究利用率的四个显着理论的预测相比，这是四类理论，这些理论是研究人员和政策制定者之间的界面 - 政治行政决策模型，研究使用的类型学;社区不和谐理论;和政策议程 - 设定/多流理论。政策制定者最常见的八项研究贡献减少政策制定者，政党和各种各样的党派极化程度。在某些方面，政策制定者的看法与理论良好一致，例如对个人考虑的贡献（例如，通知，解释和证明一个人的职位），以及政策发布考虑因素（例如，定义问题;设计立法） 。然而，其他捐款很少预测，例如贡献研究对政策制定者的关系（赢得同事的信任;教育其他人）和政策进程（提出重要问题;加强辩论，对话，协作和妥协）。政策制定者报告说，这些研究贡献提供了政策和政治利益。提出了推进研究利用理论的含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号