Elsevier

Research Policy

Volume 30, Issue 2, February 2001, Pages 333-349
Research Policy

Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00081-0Get rights and content

Abstract

This paper addresses three questions: What is the extent of the use of social science research in Canada? Are there differences between the social sciences disciplines regarding extent of use? What are the determinants of utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada? The paper develops and tests an empirical model that derives its dependent and independent variables from prior studies in knowledge utilization. Instead of limiting utilization to instrumental use, the paper defines utilization as a six-stage cumulative process. Based on a survey of 1229 Canadian social science scholars, the findings of this study show that nearly half of the research results lend to some use by practitioners, professionals and decision-makers. Furthermore, comparisons of means of utilization show that the professional social sciences (social work and industrial relations) lend to higher levels of utilization than the disciplinary social sciences (economics, political science, sociology and anthropology). Multivariate regression analyses show that the most important determinants of utilization are the mechanisms linking the researchers to the users, the dissemination efforts, the adaptation of research outputs undertaken by the researchers, the users' context and the publication assets of the researchers. The other explanatory factors exert a more mitigated influence on knowledge utilization. The last part of the paper derives policy implications from the regression results. Overall, the most important finding of this paper is that knowledge utilization depends much more heavily on factors regarding the behavior of the researchers' and users' context than on the attributes of the research products.

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
QUANPResearch 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).
QUALPResearch 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)

  • W.N. Dunn

    Measuring knowledge use

    Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion

    (1983)
  • L.A. Edwards

    Using knowledge and technology to improve the quality of life of people who have disabilities: a prosumer approach

    (1991)
  • Hall, G., George, A., Rutherford, W., 1979. Measuring Stages of Concern About the Innovation: A Manual for Use of the...
  • G. Hall et al.

    Levels of use of the innovation: a framework for analyzing innovation adoption

    Journal of Teacher Education

    (1975)
  • M. Huberman

    Steps toward an integrated model of research utilization

    Knowledge

    (1987)
  • M. Huberman

    Research utilization: the state of art

    Knowledge and Policy

    (1994)
  • Huberman, M., Thurler, G., 1991. De la recherche à la pratique. Éléments de base, Éditions Scientifiques Européennes,...
  • K. Johnson

    Stimulating evaluation by integrating academia and practice

    Knowledge

    (1980)
  • S.J. Kline et al.

    An Overview of Innovation

  • J. Knott et al.

    If dissemination is the solution, what is the problem?

    Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization

    (1980)
  • R. Landry

    Barriers to efficient monitoring of science, technology and innovation through public policy

    Journal of Science and Public Policy

    (1990)
  • J.K. Larsen

    Information Utilization and Non-Utilization. American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences, Palo alto, CA

    (1982)
  • J.P. Lester

    The utilization of policy analysis by state agency officials

    Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization

    (1993)
  • Leung, P., 1992. Translation of knowledge into practice. In Walcott and Associates, NIDRR National CRP Panel Final...
  • J. Lomas

    Finding audiences, changing beliefs: the structure of research use in Canadian health policy

    Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law

    (1990)
  • J. Lomas
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text