TY  - JOUR
A1  - Mohajerzad, Hadjar
A1  - Martin, Andreas
A1  - Christ, Johannes
A1  - Widany, Sarah
T1  - Bridging the gap between science and practice
BT  - Research collaboration and the perception of research findings
JF  - Frontiers in psychology / Frontiers Research Foundation
N2  - Research collaboration promises a useful approach to bridging the gap between research and practice and thus promoting evidence-informed education. This study examines whether information on research collaboration can influence the reception of research knowledge. We assume that the composition of experts from the field and scientists in a research team sends out signals that influence trust in as well as the relevance and applicability of the finding. In a survey experiment with practitioners from the field of adult education the influence of different research team compositions around an identical finding is tested. The results show overall high trust, relevance and applicability ratings with regard to the finding, regardless of the composition of the research team. We discuss the potential importance of additional information about research collaborations for effective knowledge translation and point out the need for more empirical research.
KW  - science and practice relationship
KW  - research collaboration
KW  - research
KW  - findings
KW  - survey experiment
KW  - Bayes factor method
Y1  - 2021
U6  - https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.790451
SN  - 1664-1078
VL  - 12
PB  - Frontiers Media
CY  - Lausanne
ER  - 
TY  - JOUR
A1  - Heinzel, Mirko Noa
A1  - Liese, Andrea
T1  - Expert authority and support for COVID-19 measures in Germany and the UK
BT  - a survey experiment
JF  - West European politics
N2  - During COVID-19, various public institutions tried to shape citizens’ behaviour to slow the spread of the pandemic. How did their authority affect citizens’ support of public measures taken to combat the spread of COVID-19? The article makes two contributions. First, it presents a novel conceptualisation of authority as a source heuristic. Second, it analyses the authority of four types of public institutions (health ministries, universities, public health agencies, the WHO) in two countries (Germany and the UK), drawing on novel data from a survey experiment conducted in May 2020. On average, institutional endorsements seem to have mattered little. However, there is an observable polarisation effect where citizens who ascribe much expertise to public institutions support COVID-19 measures more than the control group. Furthermore, those who ascribe little expertise support them less than the control group. Finally, neither perception of biases nor exposure to institutions in public debates seems consistently to affect their authority.
KW  - COVID-19
KW  - expertise
KW  - authority
KW  - survey experiment
KW  - institutions
KW  - crises
KW  - governance
Y1  - 2021
U6  - https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2021.1873630
SN  - 0140-2382
SN  - 1743-9655
SP  - 1258
EP  - 1282
PB  - Taylor & Francis
CY  - Abingdon
ER  -