Improving impact infrastructure: key predictors of researchers’ policy engagement based on behavioural science

Abstract Despite significant investments in “impact infrastructure”—the sum of interventions promoting researchers’ policy engagement—there is a notable lack of evaluations (Oliver et al. 2022) or systematic, theory-driven evidence to inform these efforts. Given the lack of evidence on “what works,” identifying predictors of researchers’ policy engagement based on behavioural science can fill the gap and generate much-needed evidence to inform practical investments in these interventions. This article presents the first behavioural science-based comprehensive diagnosis of key predictors of policy engagement using the COM-B model, which explains behaviour based on capability, opportunity, and motivation. We operationalised the model using the Theoretical Domains Framework, which structures more granular theoretical constructs related to these components. Our analysis is based on a theory-informed, psychometrically validated survey with 1115 publicly funded researchers in Germany. Communication skills and policy literacy (capability), tangible resources and role models (opportunity), as well as incentives and “mission” (i.e., identity, duty, and purpose)-driven motivation (motivation) emerge as key behavioural predictors of policy engagement. Our analysis of social norms reveals that science advisors experience peer disapproval—evidence of a “Carl Sagan effect” for policy engagement; a stigma around engagement named after the prominent science communicator. Additionally, the evidence on training opportunities suggests that they are insufficient in quantity, quality, or both. Our findings offer an interdisciplinary perspective, combining behavioural science and policy studies, to advance the literature on researchers’ policy engagement. They lay the groundwork for developing theory-informed and evidence-based “impact infrastructure” that effectively promotes policy engagement. Organisations can align their context-specific intervention strategies with the key predictors identified in this study to increase their effectiveness and return on investment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Published
2025-09-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05793-w
Primary Topic
Health Policy Implementation Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Improving impact infrastructure: key predictors of researchers’ policy engagement based on behavioural science

Vivi Antonopoulou, Chris Tyler, Henriette Canino, Danielle D’Lima
Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
Health Policy Implementation Science
article

Improving impact infrastructure: key predictors of researchers’ policy engagement based on behavioural science

Vivi Antonopoulou, Chris Tyler, Henriette Canino, Danielle D’Lima
article en

Abstract

Abstract Despite significant investments in “impact infrastructure”—the sum of interventions promoting researchers’ policy engagement—there is a notable lack of evaluations (Oliver et al. 2022) or systematic, theory-driven evidence to inform these efforts. Given the lack of evidence on “what works,” identifying predictors of researchers’ policy engagement based on behavioural science can fill the gap and generate much-needed evidence to inform practical investments in these interventions. This article presents the first behavioural science-based comprehensive diagnosis of key predictors of policy engagement using the COM-B model, which explains behaviour based on capability, opportunity, and motivation. We operationalised the model using the Theoretical Domains Framework, which structures more granular theoretical constructs related to these components. Our analysis is based on a theory-informed, psychometrically validated survey with 1115 publicly funded researchers in Germany. Communication skills and policy literacy (capability), tangible resources and role models (opportunity), as well as incentives and “mission” (i.e., identity, duty, and purpose)-driven motivation (motivation) emerge as key behavioural predictors of policy engagement. Our analysis of social norms reveals that science advisors experience peer disapproval—evidence of a “Carl Sagan effect” for policy engagement; a stigma around engagement named after the prominent science communicator. Additionally, the evidence on training opportunities suggests that they are insufficient in quantity, quality, or both. Our findings offer an interdisciplinary perspective, combining behavioural science and policy studies, to advance the literature on researchers’ policy engagement. They lay the groundwork for developing theory-informed and evidence-based “impact infrastructure” that effectively promotes policy engagement. Organisations can align their context-specific intervention strategies with the key predictors identified in this study to increase their effectiveness and return on investment.

Humanities and Social Sciences CommunicationsVol. 12(1)
University College London (GB)
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Studienstiftung des Deutschen Volkes
Openalex Percentile: Top 58%
Health Policy Implementation Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.