There have been frequent reports of policymakers' lack of responsiveness to research knowledge in the public sector. Earlier studies point to a variety of factors that reportedly explain why research does not have a direct impact on policy decisions. This article focuses on organizational actions that were directly influenced by research and actions influenced by other sources of knowledge. Attention will also be given to determing whether different factors facilitate or inhibit decisions influenced by research as compared to decisions that take voluntary action to reduce violence without the assistance of research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CAPLAN, N.
(1976) “Social research and national policy: what gets used, by whom, for what purpose, and with what effects?”Int. Social Sci. J.28: 187-194.
2.
CAPLAN, N.A. MORRISON
, and R. J. STAMBAUGH (1975) The Use of Social Science Knowledge in Policy Decisions at the National Level. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.
3.
DESHPANDE, R.
and G. ZALTMAN (1983) “Patterns of research use in private and public sectors.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization4, 4: 561-575.
4.
DUNN, W. N.
(1983) “Measuring knowledge use.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization5, 1: 120-133.
5.
DUNN, W. N.
and F. SWIERCZEK (1977) “Planned organizational change: toward grounded theory.”J. of Applied Behavioral Sci.13: 135-157.
6.
DUNN, W. N., M. DUKES
, and A. CAHILL (1984) “Designing utilization research.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization5, 3: 387-404.
7.
FAIRWEATHER, G. W., D. H. SANDLER
, and L. G. TORNATZKY (1974) Creating Change in Mental Health Organizations. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
8.
GLASER, E. M.
and H. S. COFFEY (1967) Utilization of Applicable Research and Demonstration Results. Los Angeles: Human Interaction Research Institute.
9.
GLASER, E. M., H. H. ABELSON
, and K. N. GARRISON (1983) Putting Knowledge to Use: Facilitating the Diffusion of Knowledge and the Implementation of Planned Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
HAVELOCK, R. G.
(1969) Planning for Innovation Through Dissemination and Utilization of Knowledge. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.
11.
JOHNSON, K. W.
(1983) The Use of Research in Confronting Violence in Alaska: Final Report. Anchorage: University of Alaska, School of Justice.
12.
JOHNSON, K. W.
(1980) “Stimulating evaluation use by integrating academia and practice.”Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization2, 2: 237-262.
13.
KNORR, K. D.
(1977) “Policy makers' use of social science knowledge: symbolic or instrumental?” In C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy-Making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
14.
National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals
(1976) Criminal Justice Research and Development. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
15.
PATTON, M. Q.
(1978) Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16.
PATTON, M. Q.P. S. GRIMES
, K. M. GUTHRIE, N. J. BRENNAN, B. D. FRENCH, and D. A. BLYTH (1977) “In search of impact: an analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research,” pp. 141-163 in C. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy-Making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
17.
RICH, R. F.
(1979) The Power of Social Science Information and Public Policy-Making. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
RICH, R. F.
(1977) “Uses of social science information by federal bureaucrats: knowledge for action versus knowledge for understanding,” in C. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy-Making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
19.
RICH, R. F. (1975) “An investigation of information gathering and handling in seven federal bureaucracies: a case study of the continuous national survey.” Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago.
20.
ROBERTS, A.O.H.
and J. K. LARSEN (1971) Effective Use of Mental Health Research Information: Final Report for the National Institute of Mental Health. Palo Alto, CA: American Institute for Research.
21.
SABATIER, P.
(1978) “Acquisition and utilization of technical information by administrative agencies.”Admin. Sci. Q.23: 405-416.
22.
SALASIN, S. E.
and H. R. DAVIS (1977) “Facilitating the utilization of evaluation... a rocky road,” in I. Davidoffet al. (eds.) Evaluation of Community Mental Health Services. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education and Welfare.
23.
VAN de VALL, M.
and C. BOLAS (1982) “Using social policy research for reducing social problems: an empirical analysis of structure and functions.”J. of Applied Behavioral Sci.18, 1: 49-67.
24.
WEISS, C. H.
(1977) “Research for policy's sake: the enlightenment function of social science research.”Policy Analysis3: 531-545.
25.
WEISS, C. H.
and M. J. BUCUVALAS (1980a) Social Science Research and Decision Making. New York: Columbia Univ. Press.
26.
WEISS, C. H.
and M. J. BUCUVALAS (1980b) “Truth tests and utility tests: decision-makers' frames of reference for social science research.”Amer. Soc. Rev.45, 2: 302-313.
27.
WEISS, C. H.
and M. J. BUCUVALAS (1977) “The challenge of social research to decision making,” pp. 213-233 in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Using Social Research in Public Policy-Making. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
