A new Sage white paper reports a gap between the aspirations for societal impact among social and behavioral science (SBS) researchers and the leaders and systems that shape academic careers. While researchers worldwide remain committed to influencing outcomes beyond academia, many cite a disconnect between these goals and the incentive structures determined by universities.
The report, 'Do social scientists care if they make societal impact?' compiles responses from more than 1,800 SBS researchers across 96 countries. Findings indicate that 92% of respondents believe the ultimate goal of research is to benefit society. However, only 76% believe their peers share the same view, and only 68% believe the same of institutional leadership.
The white paper examines the role of researcher motivation amid reduced funding and evolving policy expectations for scientific research, particularly in the social and behavioral sciences. Respondents described tensions between personal priorities and the metrics emphasized in academic evaluation processes.
Key findings include:
• Prestige metrics are misaligned with values: Researchers value peer regard more than citation metrics, yet perceive administrators prioritize impact factors, influencing tenure and promotion decisions.
• Career advancement is not the main motivator: Researchers report caring more about impact than progressing up the academic ladder, despite believing peers and institutions are more career-driven.
• Rewards for real-world application are limited: Only 37% say an institution rewards applying research outside academia through tenure or promotion, while 30% say they receive no recognition.
Survey responses also highlight concerns that traditional academic metrics do not measure whether research influences practice in meaningful ways. The white paper outlines considerations for universities, funders, and publishers interested in supporting research that benefits policy, practice, and public life.
Click here to read the original press release.
