Policy

Evidence & Policy Call for Papers – Special Issue on Research (Mis)use and Mis/Disinformation in and around Education

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

Special Issue Editors: Joel Malin and Chris Lubienski

Mis- and dis-information are growing problems world-wide, corrupting trust and engagement in consumer markets, media, politics, and other institutions. This issue is particularly concerning for research-driven areas that involve public policy. Education is a prime area. Not only do education policymakers seek ‘research-based’ policy, but schools themselves, while subjected to false information campaigns, are also uniquely suited as institutions that have the capacity to counter misinformation by providing fact-based learning and critical thinking skills.

Continue reading →

Minding the gap between research and practice in adult social care

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Karen Gray, Ailsa Cameron, Christie Cabral, Geraldine Macdonald and Linda Sumpter

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Shooting in the dark’: implications of the research–practice gap for enhancing research use in adult social care’.

There is great potential for research to inform adult social care practice. However, a gap remains between this potential and its actual use by those who plan, commission or deliver care. In our recently published paper in Evidence & Policy we consider this gap. We also reflect on the implications of the continuing need to ensure that research is there – relevant, accessible, usable and used.

In 2022 we interviewed people in three local authorities. When asked what they thought research was for, most emphasised the belief that it should improve the lives of people using services. Some mentioned improving their own practice. Others talked about its value in helping them ‘fight their corner’ when a difficult decision had to be made or course of action justified.

Continue reading →

Are evidence-based policy and democratic equality reconcilable?

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Tine Hindkjaer Madsen

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Reconciling science and democracy: evidence-based policy as seen from the perspective of a role-based democratic theory’.

For policy to be effective, it must be informed by reliable evidence, proponents of evidence-based policy argue. While this may be true, the evidence-based policy ideal nevertheless also conflicts with the requirements of democracy. This is because political equality is an essential element of democracy and evidence-based policy confers superior political influence on those who supply the evidence relative to ordinary citizens.

In my paper recently published in Evidence & Policy, I reflect on whether the evidence-based policy ideal is reconcilable with democratic equality after all. I first argue that evidence-based policy in fact also advances the value of political equality, because political equality requires that citizens be the choosers of political aims and utilising appropriate, high-quality evidence is the most reliable method of identifying how to achieve citizens’ aims. That is of course not to say that utilising appropriate, high-quality evidence will always lead to true beliefs about how to achieve a political aim, but it is the body of information we have that is most likely to be true and therefore utilising appropriate, high-quality evidence makes it more likely that citizens’ aims be realised. 

Continue reading →

Big voter is watching you: how politicians evaluate expertise

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Anina Hanimann

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘How perceptions of voter control affect politicians’ evaluations of expertise in the news: a survey experiment on the role of accountability beliefs’.

The news serves as a crucial source of expertise for members of parliament (MPs), offering them cost-effective policy advice. However, the public nature of expertise in the news can significantly influence how MPs perceive and evaluate such expertise. Politicians who feel under intense scrutiny by their constituents may be more inclined to make decisions that align with public opinion, are easily justifiable, or simply appear to be the ‘right’ choice. These motivations can significantly shape the evaluation of expertise presented in the media.

My recent study in Evidence & Policy delves into this complex dynamic. I explore whether MPs’ assessments of expertise in news media differ depending on their perceptions of voter control. To investigate this, I analysed survey data from Swiss cantonal members of parliament, who were tasked with evaluating the credibility of expert statements.

Continue reading →

Everybody can claim that a practice or policy is evidence-based. But when is it justified to do so?

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Christian Gade

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘When is it justified to claim that a practice or policy is evidence-based? Reflections on evidence and preferences’.

When you search the internet, you will find a myriad of claims about different practices or policies being evidence-based. To avoid ‘evidence-based’ becoming merely a buzzword that everyone can throw around and use whenever they deem it suitable, it is important to consider the conditions for when it is justified for you as an individual or organisation to claim that your practice or policy is evidence-based.

My argument is that this is the case if, and only if, three conditions are met – an argument that suggests that it depends on subjective preferences whether you are justified in claiming that your practice or policy is evidence-based, and that it is important to give more attention to the normative dimension of the field of evidence-based practice and policy.

Continue reading →

Scaling-up user-engagement in education research: drawing insights from Canada’s experience

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Bernadine Sengalrayan and Blane Harvey

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Engaging knowledge users in Canadian knowledge mobilisation research: a scoping review of research in education’.

In the ever-evolving landscape of education policy and practice, research has a critical role to play in informing planning and action. However, in many countries, the link between education research conducted by academics and the potential users of that research in schools and other educational settings is not robust. Knowledge mobilisation (KMb) approaches are seen as an important way to bridge the gap between research production and its practical application in any number of settings, including education.

To better understand if KMB practices are helping to inform educational policy and practice, we explored the changing dynamics of research producer-user connections in Canadian K-12 teaching and education policy. Here are some of the highlights from our findings.

Continue reading →

Learning from failure: improving behavioural health treatments through understanding mis-implementation

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

Grace Hindmarch, Alex R. Dopp, Karen Chan Osilla, Lisa S. Meredith, Jennifer K. Manuel, Kirsten Becker, Lina Tarhuni, Michael Schoenbaum, Miriam Komaromy, Andrea Cassells and Katherine E. Watkins

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Mis-implementation of evidence-based behavioural health practices in primary care: lessons from randomised trials in Federally Qualified Health Centers’, part of the Special Issue: ‘Learning from Failures in Knowledge Exchange’.

“This is disappointing, but I agree we’ve done the best we can.” 

– CEO of a rural health care system

In October 2021, a rural healthcare system in the US discontinued implementation of a new program to improve access to quality care for patients with co-occurring opioid use disorder and mental health disorders. The program’s mission, fueled by passion for patients, was to help complex patients not fall through the cracks. After two years of immense effort, the system experienced ‘mis-implementation.’  Mis-implementation refers to unsuccessful efforts to implement treatments in real-world settings. Although it is a disappointing outcome, studying mis-implementation can provide insights to improve processes and make changes more successfully in the future.

Continue reading →

Productive interactions without impact?

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

Magnus Gulbrandsen and Silje Maria Tellmann

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Productive interactions without impact? An empirical investigation of researchers’ struggle to improve elderly’s oral health’, part of the Special Issue: ‘Learning from Failures in Knowledge Exchange’.

Even if researchers do everything that is expected of them – collaborate with stakeholders, target important societal problems, engage in intensive science communication – societal impact may still not happen. What are the possible explanations?

A recurring observation in studies of the societal impacts of research is that substantial change typically involves a great deal of ‘productive interaction’ between stakeholders and researchers. However, not all interactions provide the desired societal impacts, as our empirical study of a cross-disciplinary research group focused on improving oral health in the elderly shows. In our Evidence & Policy article, we examined the subtleties of productive interactions and the intricate web of stakeholders, to shed light on the gaps that keep research efforts from having the desired societal impact.

We followed a group of researchers for six years, and even though they carried out many of the recommended activities to make impact happen, they were unable to achieve the expected outcomes. Even if many events took place that may – in an optimistic perspective – prepare the groundwork for future impact, no decisions in policy or practice targeting elderly’s oral health emerged. To analyse this process, we began by considering the oral health of the elderly as a problem area in which a wide range of stakeholders have a stake, but with varying interest, sense of urgency or capacity to make changes happen.

Continue reading →

What can we learn from co-production approaches in voluntary sector evaluation work?

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment


Louise Warwick-Booth, Ruth Cross and James Woodall

This blog post is based on the Evidence & Policy article, ‘Obstacles to co-producing evaluation knowledge: power, control and voluntary sector dynamics’, part of the Special Issue: ‘Learning from Failures in Knowledge Exchange’.

Co-production has been increasingly discussed as a positive and useful approach in health and social care research, based on principles such as partnership working, reciprocation, power sharing and the appreciation of all expertise. We have used co-production values to inform our evaluation work for many years, but in our Evidence & Policy article we reflect upon the challenges that such approaches bring, specifically in relation to sharing findings, known as knowledge exchange. Our article discusses evaluation work across three interventions that constitute perhaps the most challenging of our experiences in over a decade of such work. Conflict in evaluation work remains largely underreported, but we feel our experiences provide a useful contribution for readers.

Continue reading →

Evidence & Policy Call for Papers – Special Issue on Learning through Comparison

evidencepolicyblogLeave a comment

Special Issue Editors: Katherine Smith, Valerie Pattyn and Niklas Andersen

Evidence & Policy is pleased to invite abstracts for papers that explicitly employ comparative analysis and/or that develop insights about evidence use in policy through comparison. Authors of selected abstracts will be invited to submit a full paper for consideration for inclusion in a special issue that is aiming to demonstrate the conceptual and empirical contribution that comparative research can offer scholarship on evidence and policy.

Continue reading →