...
首页> 外文期刊>Research evaluation >Conceptualizing the societal impact of research in terms of elements of logic models: a survey of researchers in sub-Saharan Africa
【24h】

Conceptualizing the societal impact of research in terms of elements of logic models: a survey of researchers in sub-Saharan Africa

机译:概念化研究的社会影响在逻辑模型的元素方面:撒哈拉以南非洲研究人员调查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

This study addressed the conceptualization of the societal impact of research from the perspective of programme evaluation, by focusing on the three 'result' elements of logic models: outputs, outcomes, and impact. In research evaluation, the distinction could resemble a difference between product, use, and benefit. The study established whether researchers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), South Africa excluded, view societal impact as extending across all three elements or as confined to the last element only. A web survey of 485 SSA researchers was conducted, as researchers from this region are not yet bounded by policy definitions of impact. The survey imposed the three elements of logic models onto five hypothetical descriptions of 'impactful' research initiatives. Respondents rated each element in terms of how much it reflects the societal impact of research. For any initiative, use was more likely to be considered a strong example of societal impact compared to a product, but less likely so compared to benefit. Between 23% and 43% of respondents rated all three elements as strong examples of the societal impact of research. Responses were analyzed by SSA region and the research domain and years of research experience of survey participants. An open-ended question about own understandings of societal impact was included as well in the survey. The responses portrayed impact as a (generally) positive effect that contributes to change in the daily life of human kind. The expectation that research should have impact at an almost general level of aggregation could be unique to the SSA context.
机译:本研究通过专注于逻辑模型的三个“结果”元素,从方案评估的角度介绍了研究的社会影响的概念化:产出,结果和影响。在研究评估中,区别可以类似于产品,使用和益处之间的差异。该研究确定了南非撒哈拉以南非洲(SSA)的研究人员是否被排除在外,将社会的影响视为在所有三个元素中延伸或仅限于最后一个元素。对485个SSA研究人员进行了网络调查,因为该地区的研究人员尚未受到影响的政策定义。该调查将逻辑模型的三个要素施加到了对“有影响力”的研究举措的五个假设描述。受访者根据其反映了研究的社会影响的方式评定了每个元素。对于任何倡议,与产品相比,使用更有可能被认为是社会影响的强烈示例,但与利益相比,可能不太可能。 23%至43%的受访者评定了所有三个要素,作为研究的社会影响的强大实例。 SSA地区分析了响应以及调查参与者的研究领域和多年的研究经验。在调查中,还包括对自己对社会影响的理解的开放式问题。响应描绘了影响(一般)积极效应,这有助于改变人类日常生活。研究应该对几乎一般的聚合水平产生影响可能是SSA上下文的影响。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号