Conference: Assessing the Impacts of Engaged Research and Its Use: Evidence and Opportunities

要提高科学的社会效益，需要系统地关注进行研究的方式，以及不同的方法如何产生不同种类和程度的影响。关于研究影响驱动因素的现有研究表明，更多地参与的方法--研究人员在研究过程中与社会伙伴进行有意义的合作--可以增加对研究的使用，以支持决策。然而，我们对各种形式或程度的参与如何在现实世界中产生不同的社会利益知之甚少；某些类型的参与甚至可能有害或适得其反。要提高对这一领域的理解，就需要对参与研究的类型及其结果进行实证性和批判性研究。该项目的一个主要目的是在理解、支持和改进参与式研究及其使用的许多方法之间建立联系和协调能力。该小组将召集不同部门的学者和机构领导人，以综合现有证据，并确定与参与式研究的影响和使用有关的未来方向。该项目的核心包括规划、执行和后续报告，以促进跨学科和面向解决方案的研讨会。研讨会将召集一个来自不同学科、问题领域、地域和专业知识类型的专家小组，进行为期一周的密集对话。参与者(n=约30)将共同努力，综合现有知识，找出差距，建立理解和联系，并就1)参与研究过程的质量、强度和持久性、2)研究影响(例如，在决策中使用证据)和3)感兴趣的结果(例如，改善健康或教育结果)之间的关系制定下一步步骤。这次会议的成果将包括一份报告和行动呼吁，旨在激励和告知科学机构的决策，包括国家科学基金会，他们对扩大对参与研究的支持非常感兴趣。这一奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

Improving the societal benefits of science requires systematic attention to the ways in which research is conducted and how different approaches may result in various kinds and degrees of impact. Existing studies on research impact drivers suggest that more engaged approaches—where researchers meaningfully collaborate with societal partners during the research process—can increase the use of research to support decision-making. However, we know relatively little about how various forms or levels of engagement result in different societal benefits in the real world; some types of engagement may even be harmful or counterproductive. Improving understanding in this area requires empirical and critical study of the types of engaged research and their outcomes. A primary aim of this project is to build connections and coordination capacity among the many approaches to understanding, supporting, and improving engaged research and its uses. The team will convene scholars and institutional leaders across sectors to synthesize existing evidence and identify future directions related to the impacts and uses of engaged research.The heart of this project involves planning, execution, and follow-on reporting from an interdisciplinary and solutions-oriented workshop facilitated. The workshop will convene a small group of experts from a diverse range of disciplines, issue areas, geographies, and types of expertise for a weeklong intensive dialogue. The participants (n = approx. 30) will work together to synthesize existing knowledge, identify gaps, build understanding and connections, and forge next steps on the relationship among 1) the quality, intensity, and longevity of engagement in the research process, 2) research impact (e.g., use of evidence in decision making), and 3) outcomes of interest (e.g., improved health or educational outcomes). The output from this meeting will include a report and a call to action intended to inspire and inform decision-making at scientific institutions, including the National Science Foundation, keenly interested in expanding their support for engaged research.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.