Introducing “Impact Validity”

This article introduces and explores the concept impact validity, which is conceptualized as the extent to which research has the potential to play a role in social and political change or is useful as a tool for advocacy or activism. Including impact validity in the design of a research project means that, in addition to considering traditional criteria for determining the methodological rigor of research, it is also critical to consider the many related decisions that researchers make when working toward social change. In this article, the theory and methodology of impact validity and the assumptions that position impact validity as both a valid scientific approach, and a useful tool for promoting a more engaged social science, are considered. A “how to” guide is also provided that offers three guiding principles for enhancing impact validity: the strategic choice of research question, having explicit and realistic strategies for using research, and the strategic framing, communicating, and disseminating of findings.

[1]  The Effects of Different Teaching, Research, and Service Emphases on Individual and Organizational Outcomes in Higher Education Institutions , 2009 .

[2]  A. C. Elms.  The crisis of confidence in social psychology. , 1975 .

[3]  S. Levay,et al.  A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men , 1991, Science.

[4]  Thomas E. Backer,et al.  Knowledge Utilization , 1991 .

[5]  A. Stefancic,et al.  Pathways Housing First for Homeless Persons with Psychiatric Disabilities: Program Innovation, Research, and Advocacy , 2013 .

[6]  Carol H. Weiss,et al.  Knowledge Creep and Decision Accretion , 1980 .

[7]  P. Hegarty,et al.  Public Engagement, Knowledge Transfer, and Impact Validity , 2013 .

[8]  Brian D. Christens,et al.  An Approach to Scholarly Impact through Strategic Engagement in Community-Based Research , 2013 .

[9]  R. Barreras,et al.  New York City's Struggle over Syringe Exchange: A Case Study of the Intersection of Science, Activism, and Political Change , 2013 .

[10]  S. Scarr.  Psychological science in the public arena: Three cases of dubious influence , 1995 .

[11]  Carolina Muñoz Proto,et al.  Memoscopio: Producing Usable and Collectively Owned Knowledge About the World March for Peace and Nonviolence , 2013 .

[12]  Anna Neumann,et al.  To Give and to Receive: Recently Tenured Professors' Experiences of Service in Major Research Universities , 2007 .

[13]  Michelle Fine,et al.  To Be of Use , 2001 .

[14]  Patti Lather.  Research as Praxis , 1986 .

[15]  P. Hegarty.  Materializing the Hypothalamus: A Performative Account of the `Gay Brain' , 1997 .

[16]  S. Morin,et al.  Substance abuse prevention: moving from science to policy. , 2000, Addictive behaviors.

[17]  K. Weick.  Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems. , 1984 .

[18]  Robert F. Rich,et al.  Knowledge Creation, Diffusion, and Utilization , 1991 .

[19]  J. K. Larsen.  Review Essay : Knowledge Utilization , 1980 .

[20]  Amy Kwan,et al.  Application of Empirical Research Findings in Public Health Advocacy: Focus on Maternal, Child, and Reproductive Health , 2013 .

[21]  F. Furstenberg.  Children and Family Change: Discourse between Social Scientists and the Media , 1999 .

[22]  E. Seidman.  Back to the future, community psychology: Unfolding a theory of social intervention , 1988, American journal of community psychology.

[23]  Benjamin Bowling,et al.  The rise and fall of New York murder: zero tolerance or crack's decline? , 1999 .

[24]  E. Marshall.  When does intellectual passion become conflict of interest? , 1992, Science.