Crowley D Max, Scott J Taylor, Long Elizabeth C, Green Lawrie, Giray Cagla, Gay Brittany, Israel Azaliah, Storace Rachel, McCauley Mary, Donovan Michael
College of Health and Human Development.
Department of Psychology.
Am Psychol. 2021 Nov;76(8):1307-1322. doi: 10.1037/amp0000880.
Key to bringing psychological science to bear on public policy is developing scholars' engagement and rapport with policymakers. Scholars benefit from support navigating the policy arena in ways that strengthen their independent policy engagement. This study presents findings from a randomized controlled trial of the Research-to-Policy Collaboration (RPC) model, which develops and trains a rapid response network of researchers to respond to legislative requests for scientific evidence. Researchers were surveyed on their concerns about how policymakers support or use scientific research, how they engaged with policymakers, and perceived benefits to their research. Researchers randomized to the RPC reported fewer concerns about policymakers' support and use of research, greater involvement in supporting policymakers' understanding of problems (i.e., conceptual use), and more responses to external prompts for their involvement. Subgroup analyses examined how experiences differed for those identifying as Black, Indigenous, or Person of Color (BIPOC). At baseline, BIPOC-identifying researchers perceived greater costs of policy engagement and reported less involvement in supporting conceptual or instrumental uses of research than White-identifying researchers. Subsequent to the RPC, BIPOC-identifying researchers in the intervention group were reportedly less concerned about federal support of science, more engaged in supporting conceptual uses of research, and perceived greater benefits of policy engagement for their research than BIPOC-identifying researchers in the control group. These differences were not observed among White-identifying researchers. Findings are discussed in light of disparities experienced by marginalized scholars, the ways in which resources and supports may counteract these challenges, and possible strategies to strengthen public psychology overall. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
将心理科学应用于公共政策的关键在于培养学者与政策制定者的互动和融洽关系。学者们受益于在政策领域的支持，这种支持以加强他们独立的政策参与度的方式进行。本研究展示了研究到政策合作（RPC）模型的随机对照试验结果，该模型开发并培训了一个快速反应的研究人员网络，以回应立法机构对科学证据的请求。研究人员被调查了他们对政策制定者如何支持或使用科学研究的担忧、他们与政策制定者的互动方式以及对其研究的感知益处。被随机分配到RPC组的研究人员对政策制定者支持和使用研究的担忧较少，更多地参与支持政策制定者对问题的理解（即概念性使用），并且对外部要求其参与的提示做出了更多回应。亚组分析考察了那些自认为是黑人、原住民或有色人种（BIPOC）的人的经历有何不同。在基线时，自认为是BIPOC的研究人员认为政策参与的成本更高，并且报告称在支持研究的概念性或工具性使用方面比自认为是白人的研究人员参与度更低。在RPC之后，据报道，干预组中自认为是BIPOC的研究人员对联邦对科学的支持的担忧减少，更多地参与支持研究的概念性使用，并且比对照组中自认为是BIPOC的研究人员更能感受到政策参与对其研究的益处。在自认为是白人的研究人员中未观察到这些差异。我们根据边缘化学者所经历的差异、资源和支持可能应对这些挑战的方式以及加强整体公共心理学的可能策略来讨论这些发现。（PsycInfo数据库记录（c）2022美国心理学会，保留所有权利）
