Deck 11: Building Evidence-Based Family Policy: Insights From the Family Impact Seminars

Question 1

Connections between research and policy are more likely to be found in democratic countries and less likely to be found in corporatist countries.

Answer 1

False

Question 2

One of the largest impediments to the advancement of family policy is the division between social science researchers and policymakers.

Answer 2

True

Question 3

Family Impact Seminars enable researchers to communicate evidence to policymakers, lobbyists, and the media via presentations, discussion sessions and briefings.

Answer 3

False

Question 4

Family Impact Seminars aim to engender respect for research in policymaking, encourage the use of the family impact lens, and provide a neutral, nonpartisan setting for policymakers to engage in open, productive dialogue.

Question 5

Policymakers are given evaluations at the end of family impact seminars that overcome the social desirability bias by asking for responses of "not at all," "a little," and "quite a bit."

Question 6

Family Impact Seminars value educating policymakers with evidence from research over forming relationships with policymakers to collaborate on policy.

Question 7

According to Kuhn's paradigm shift theory, a window of opportunity is open to present policymakers with specific ideas when the conditions are ideal for social change. It is then that policymakers believe the investment of their resources is worth the effort.

Question 8

Why does community dissonance theory suggest that research is underutilized in policymaking? In what specific ways do the Family Impact Seminars incorporate the tenets of community dissonance theory?

Question 9

If you were the evaluator of the Family Impact Seminars, would you focus primarily on how research presented at the Seminar influences a policy decision? Why or why not? What other outcomes might you track?