Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada
Introduction
Policy makers, practitioners, and even social science scholars assume that users rarely apply social science knowledge Caplan, 1979, Dunn, 1980, Weiss, 1980, Nagel, 1987, Lester, 1993, Rappert, 1997, Wilensky, 1997. A review of literature suggests that this dismal picture might be explained by two factors. First, although theoretical and empirical contributions to knowledge utilization are accumulating, the impression persists that more stress has been laid on reflexive and theoretical studies than on empirical analyses. However, excellent exemplar empirical studies are more abundant than critics realize. From among these exemplar studies, one must mention Huberman and Thurler (1991), Lester (1993), Unrau and McDonald (1995), Oh and Rich (1996) and Oh (1997). The empirical studies in knowledge utilization are not very visible because they are scattered through the journals of many diverse disciplines. Second, the dismal picture might also have arisen from a narrow definition of knowledge utilization, which, too often, associates utilization only to instrumental use of knowledge in decision making or professional practice.
This paper aims to contribute to the empirical side of knowledge utilization by using a more nuanced definition of utilization. Based on a survey of 1229 Canadian social science scholars, it addresses the following three questions: What is the extent of the use of social science research in Canada? Are there differences between the social science disciplines regarding extent of use? What are the determinants of utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada? By using the same set of explanatory variables for different social science disciplines, we will be able to show that the same explanatory variables are not equally important across disciplines in accounting for knowledge utilization. We expect that different scientific disciplines lead to different utilization of knowledge since the contexts in which knowledge is produced and processed are influenced by effects of the different contexts in which scientists and users operate. This paper explores the influence of such contexts on knowledge utilization. Instead of considering, like most empirical studies in the field, to what extent policy-makers use social science research results in the accomplishment of their work, we turn the attention to the actions that the individual researchers undertake to promote the utilization of their research results.
The paper is organized as follows. First, it reviews the major theoretical models of knowledge utilization to derive an integrated model considering a variety of explanatory factors employed in different theories of knowledge utilization. Second, it reviews the empirical literature to discuss definitions and operational measures of knowledge utilization, and definitions and operational measures of independent variables used to explain utilization. Third, the paper presents the data collection technique used in the survey administered to social science scholars of Canadian universities. Fourth, it introduces a regression model about the determinants of knowledge utilization. Finally, the paper presents and discusses the results.
Section snippets
Prior theoretical studies of knowledge utilization
Models of knowledge utilization discussed in the literature on knowledge utilization focus on four major alternatives Weiss, 1979, Kline and Rosenberg, 1986, Yin and Moore, 1988, Landry, 1990: a science push model, a demand pull model, a dissemination model and an interaction model. While each model supports the importance of research results in policy making, there are differences among them regarding major determinants of knowledge utilization.
The science push model stresses the supply of
Research design
Studies in the field of knowledge utilization are based on two designs: the product design and the process design. In the former, respondents are asked to identify how the results of a single study affect a particular decision of the users of research. In the latter, respondents are asked to identify how the knowledge produced across all the stages of the research process influences all the spectrum of the stages of the decision-making process of the users. Assuming that a specific decision can
Extent and differences of uses of social science results
As shown in Table 3 on the stages of knowledge utilization, our results indicate that nearly 50% of the Canadian scholars in social sciences reported that they usually or always transmit their research findings to practitioners, professionals and decision makers. At the other extreme, 20% of the respondents never transmit their findings to users or consider that this question does not apply to their situation. As one moves though the six stages from transmission to application, one can observe
The dependent variable measure
Following Lester (1993), the dependent variable of this study is an index derived from the Knott and Wildavsky, (1980) scale. As already mentioned, this scale includes the following six cumulative stages of knowledge utilization: transmission, cognition, reference, effort, influence and application generating, as described previously, a scale score ranging from 0 to 105.
An item analysis on the components of this additive scale was performed by computing the Cronbach's α. This coefficient
The independent variables measures
The independent variables included in the explanatory model are measured as follows:Types of research products QUANP Research products based on data analyzed using correlation or multivariate techniques (1=correlation or multivariate techniques are usually or always used in research projects and 0=otherwise). QUALP Research products based on case studies using qualitative data. (1=case studies using qualitative data are usually or always used in research projects and 0=otherwise). Researchers'
Results
Regression results are summarized in Table 5. It can be seen that, in the comprehensive model that includes all the social science disciplines, use of quantitative methodologies, adaptation of research results, dissemination efforts, linkage mechanisms, users' context, publication assets and external funding are significantly and positively related to the utilization of social science research results. The four other variables included in the model, namely, qualitative research products, focus
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for its financial support and the anonymous referees for their comments and suggestions.
References (53)
Balancing relevance and excellence: organizational response to link research with decision making
Soc. Sci. Med.
(1992)- et al.
The utilization of public policy analysis: a conceptual framework
Evaluation and Program Planning
(1990) Research and evidence-based decision making
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health
(1997)- et al.
The utilization process. A conceptual framework and synthesis of empirical findings
Administrative Science Quarterly
(1982) Researching policy research
Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization
(1990)The use of social science information by federal executives
The two communities theory and knowledge utilization
American Behavioral Scientist
(1979)The coming transformation in evaluation
- et al.
An exploratory tool for predicting adoption decisions
Science Communication
(1994) The two communities metaphor and models of knowledge use
Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization
(1980)