What determines public affairs researchers’ motivations for policy impact? Results from an exploratory study

IF 2.7 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
John P. Nelson, S. Lindsay
{"title":"What determines public affairs researchers’ motivations for policy impact? Results from an exploratory study","authors":"John P. Nelson, S. Lindsay","doi":"10.1177/00208523221141346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although public policy and public administration are intuitively practical fields of scholarship, much public affairs research never affects practice. Previous studies have shown that one major predictor of whether a given research study or researcher achieves impact is the researcher's motivation to do so. Using data from a survey of 409 authors of articles in major public affairs journals, we present and test models of the determinants of researchers’ use motivations with regard to specific research studies and over the course of their careers. Results indicate that previous experience as a practitioner is positively associated with perceived career-long use motivation and rewards for use associated with tenure and promotion, although not with annual evaluations. In addition, project-specific use motivation is positively associated with perceived career-long use motivation, academic age, a study suggestion made by a practitioner, and methodological contribution. Motivations based on a desire to appear productive or on suggestions from researcher colleagues are negatively associated with study-specific use. Points for practitioners Academic motivation to affect policymaking is positively associated with rewards associated with tenure and promotion, although not with year-end evaluations. Longer-serving researchers, and those with practitioner experience, report greater motivation to affect practice through their research.","PeriodicalId":47811,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","volume":"89 1","pages":"901 - 918"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Administrative Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523221141346","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Although public policy and public administration are intuitively practical fields of scholarship, much public affairs research never affects practice. Previous studies have shown that one major predictor of whether a given research study or researcher achieves impact is the researcher's motivation to do so. Using data from a survey of 409 authors of articles in major public affairs journals, we present and test models of the determinants of researchers’ use motivations with regard to specific research studies and over the course of their careers. Results indicate that previous experience as a practitioner is positively associated with perceived career-long use motivation and rewards for use associated with tenure and promotion, although not with annual evaluations. In addition, project-specific use motivation is positively associated with perceived career-long use motivation, academic age, a study suggestion made by a practitioner, and methodological contribution. Motivations based on a desire to appear productive or on suggestions from researcher colleagues are negatively associated with study-specific use. Points for practitioners Academic motivation to affect policymaking is positively associated with rewards associated with tenure and promotion, although not with year-end evaluations. Longer-serving researchers, and those with practitioner experience, report greater motivation to affect practice through their research.
是什么决定了公共事务研究者对政策影响的动机?探索性研究的结果
尽管公共政策和公共行政在直觉上是学术的实践领域,但许多公共事务研究从未影响实践。先前的研究表明,一项研究或研究人员是否产生影响的一个主要预测因素是研究人员这样做的动机。利用对409位主要公共事务期刊文章作者的调查数据,我们提出并测试了研究人员在特定研究和职业生涯中使用动机的决定因素模型。结果表明,以前作为从业者的经历与感知的职业生涯长期使用动机和与任期和晋升相关的使用奖励呈正相关,尽管与年度评估无关。此外,项目特定的使用动机与感知的职业生涯长期使用动机、学术年龄、从业者提出的研究建议和方法学贡献呈正相关。基于表现出富有成效的愿望或研究人员同事的建议的动机与研究特定用途呈负相关。从业者的分数影响决策的学术动机与任期和晋升相关的奖励呈正相关,尽管与年终评估无关。服务时间较长的研究人员和有从业经验的研究人员报告说,他们更有动力通过研究影响实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: IRAS is an international peer-reviewed journal devoted to academic and professional public administration. Founded in 1927 it is the oldest scholarly public administration journal specifically focused on comparative and international topics. IRAS seeks to shape the future agenda of public administration around the world by encouraging reflection on international comparisons, new techniques and approaches, the dialogue between academics and practitioners, and debates about the future of the field itself.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信