Designing Utilization Research

Abstract

causes and effects of knowledge creation, diffusion, and utilization. The term &dquo;design&dquo; refers to plans, strategies, or approaches that specify conditions under which these causal inferences may be justified. The primary purpose of research design is to raise questions of causal inference to a level of explicit consciousness where rival hypotheses may be systematically considered and weighed. Research design thus provides answers to research questions within a framework of reflective causal reasoning.This and previous issues of RESEARCH IN PROGRESS (see Dunn, 1983) are based on results of an 18-month project supported by the National Institute of Education. One of the main objectives of this project was to construct design profiles of knowledge utilization studies conducted to date. These profiles, constructed for more than 50 studies, were based on a standard coding format that captures a variety of design characteristics (e.g., unit of analysis, sampling frame, methods of data collection) that affect the capacity of investigators to make plausible causal inferences.

Exploring the field and practice of knowledge mobilization: identifying common approaches and priority competencies using Q-methodology

“…Beyond the surface level of multiplicity in terminology, there is a fractured and divisive understanding of what it means to use, act upon, or uptake research (Dunn, Dukes, and Cahill, 1984;Landry, Amara, & Lamari, 2001a, 2001bLomas, 1993;Seidel, 1981). These three verbs alone -use, act upon, and uptake -already hint at the range in approaches to KMb.…”

Research Utilization in the Social Sciences

“…Investigations of research utilization have mainly focused on case studies of specific policy domains (e.g., Kramer & Wells, 2005; Weiss & Bucuvalas, 1980; Wilkinson et al, 2012), and only a few studies have examined research impact across different research disciplines (see Landry et al, 2001b). While case studies on research utilization have been important in providing insight into the nuances of knowledge translation and impact, their generalizability to other fields is open to debate (Dunn, Dukes, & Cahill, 1984; Landry, Amara, & Lamari, 2001a; Landry et al, 2001b; Seidel, 1981). The absence of studies that aim to examine research utilization across the social sciences means that our understanding about disciplinary variations in research translation and uptake is limited.…”