The impact and influence of longitudinal studies in the UK: a reply to 'Re-considering "impact" for longitudinal social science research: towards more scientific approaches to theorising and measuring the influence of cohort studies' by Bridger Staatz et al.

Abstract

This is a reply to 'Re-considering "impact" for longitudinal social science research: towards more scientific approaches to theorising and measuring the influence of cohort studies' by Charis Bridger Staatz, Evangeline Tabor and Dylan Kneale. Should the impact of longitudinal studies include wider dimensions compared to how research impact is defined by the Research Excellence Framework (REF)? The authors argue that this is because there are some unique challenges faced by longitudinal studies in generating and measuring impact. In particular impact can't just be tracked through physical documents and citations. The temporal nature of the studies means looking beyond individual pieces of research to understand the emerging themes in a body of work, and considering the impact of those themes. They also make the case that not all impact has to be economic or policy driven, and here the capacity building contribution of the studies within academia is vital. Both those findings are welcome. REF needs to better reflect the actual contribution of long-term social science studies, particularly as part of UK's data infrastructure. However, the impact of longitudinal studies is not simply constrained by design but also by short-termism in policy making, and the slow progress made on prevention policy across difference domains of life.