Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,222

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Many Meanings of Research Utilization

Weiss, Carol H.·1979·Public Administration Review
DOI 10.2307/3109916
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This is a time when more and more social scientists are becoming concerned about making their useful for public policy makers and policy makers are displaying spurts of well publicized concern about the usefulness of the social science that government funds support. There is mutual interest in whether social science intended to influence policy is actually used but before that important issue can profitably be addressed it is essential to understand what using actually means. A review of the literature reveals that a diverse array of meanings is attached to the term. Much of the ambiguity in the discussion of research utilization-and conflicting interpretations of its prevalence and the routes by which it occurs-derives from conceptual confusion. If we are to gain a better understanding of the extent to which social science has affected public policy in the past and learn how to make its contribution more effective in the future we need to clarify the concept. Upon examination the use of social science in the sphere of public policy is an extraordinarily complex phenomenon. Authors who have addressed the subject have evoked diverse images of the processes and purposes of utilization. Here I will try to extract seven different meanings that have been associated with the concept. (excerpt)

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/3109916

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Weiss, C. H.
Venue
Public Administration Review
Publisher
JSTOR
Published
1979-09
Volume
39
Issue
5
Pages
426
ISSN
0033-3352 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/3109916
OpenAlex
W2088763003
Cited by
2,222
References
0
FWCI
23.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.