Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.

Access to reliable and timely information ensures that decision-makers can operate effectively. The motivations and challenges of parliamentarians and policy-makers in accessing evidence have been well documented in the policy literature. However, there has been little focus on research-providers. U...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lindsay A Walker, Natalia S Lawrence, Chris D Chambers, Marsha Wood, Julie Barnett, Hannah Durrant, Lindsey Pike, Gerard O'Grady, Sven Bestmann, Andrew P Kythreotis
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214136
id doaj-75b4b107d9ae499189e65fb4c4b191fc
record_format Article
spelling doaj-75b4b107d9ae499189e65fb4c4b191fc2021-03-03T20:47:24ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01143e021413610.1371/journal.pone.0214136Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.Lindsay A WalkerNatalia S LawrenceChris D ChambersMarsha WoodJulie BarnettHannah DurrantLindsey PikeGerard O'GradySven BestmannAndrew P KythreotisAccess to reliable and timely information ensures that decision-makers can operate effectively. The motivations and challenges of parliamentarians and policy-makers in accessing evidence have been well documented in the policy literature. However, there has been little focus on research-providers. Understanding both the demand- and the supply-side of research engagement is imperative to enhancing impactful interactions. Here, we examine the broader experiences, motivations and challenges of UK-based research professionals engaging with research-users relevant to policy-making and scrutiny in the UK using a nationwide online questionnaire. The context of the survey partly involved contributing to the UK Evidence Information Service (EIS), a proposed rapid match-making service to facilitate interaction between parliamentary arenas that use evidence and research-providers. Our findings reveal, at least for this sub-sample who responded, that there are gender-related differences in policy-related experience, motivations, incentives and challenges for research professionals to contribute to evidence-informed decision-making through initiatives such as the EIS. Male and female participants were equally likely to have policy experience; however, males reported both significantly broader engagement with the research-users included in the survey and significantly higher levels of engagement with each research-user. Reported incentives for engagement included understanding what the evidence will be used for, guidance on style and content of contribution, and acknowledgement of contributions by the policymaker or elected official. Female participants were significantly more likely to select the guidance-related options. The main reported barrier was workload. We discuss how academia-policy engagement initiatives can best address these issues in ways that enhance the integration of research evidence with policy and practice across the UK.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214136
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Lindsay A Walker
Natalia S Lawrence
Chris D Chambers
Marsha Wood
Julie Barnett
Hannah Durrant
Lindsey Pike
Gerard O'Grady
Sven Bestmann
Andrew P Kythreotis
spellingShingle Lindsay A Walker
Natalia S Lawrence
Chris D Chambers
Marsha Wood
Julie Barnett
Hannah Durrant
Lindsey Pike
Gerard O'Grady
Sven Bestmann
Andrew P Kythreotis
Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Lindsay A Walker
Natalia S Lawrence
Chris D Chambers
Marsha Wood
Julie Barnett
Hannah Durrant
Lindsey Pike
Gerard O'Grady
Sven Bestmann
Andrew P Kythreotis
author_sort Lindsay A Walker
title Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.
title_short Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.
title_full Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.
title_fullStr Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.
title_full_unstemmed Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals.
title_sort supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: a consultation of uk research professionals.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Access to reliable and timely information ensures that decision-makers can operate effectively. The motivations and challenges of parliamentarians and policy-makers in accessing evidence have been well documented in the policy literature. However, there has been little focus on research-providers. Understanding both the demand- and the supply-side of research engagement is imperative to enhancing impactful interactions. Here, we examine the broader experiences, motivations and challenges of UK-based research professionals engaging with research-users relevant to policy-making and scrutiny in the UK using a nationwide online questionnaire. The context of the survey partly involved contributing to the UK Evidence Information Service (EIS), a proposed rapid match-making service to facilitate interaction between parliamentary arenas that use evidence and research-providers. Our findings reveal, at least for this sub-sample who responded, that there are gender-related differences in policy-related experience, motivations, incentives and challenges for research professionals to contribute to evidence-informed decision-making through initiatives such as the EIS. Male and female participants were equally likely to have policy experience; however, males reported both significantly broader engagement with the research-users included in the survey and significantly higher levels of engagement with each research-user. Reported incentives for engagement included understanding what the evidence will be used for, guidance on style and content of contribution, and acknowledgement of contributions by the policymaker or elected official. Female participants were significantly more likely to select the guidance-related options. The main reported barrier was workload. We discuss how academia-policy engagement initiatives can best address these issues in ways that enhance the integration of research evidence with policy and practice across the UK.
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0214136
work_keys_str_mv AT lindsayawalker supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT nataliaslawrence supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT chrisdchambers supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT marshawood supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT juliebarnett supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT hannahdurrant supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT lindseypike supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT gerardogrady supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT svenbestmann supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
AT andrewpkythreotis supportingevidenceinformedpolicyandscrutinyaconsultationofukresearchprofessionals
_version_ 1714820512096452608