Opportunities for impact: Statistical analysis of the national science foundation's broader impacts criterion

23Citations
Citations of this article
64Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Though the US National Science Foundation introduced a broader impacts criterion to their merit review process in 1997, policy evaluations remain still scarce. Reactions from different scientific fields varied. This paper aims to quantitatively compare the proposed broader impacts of 360 funded abstracts from biology, engineering, and mathematical/physical sciences. Specifically, it considers whether or not certain fields are more likely to propose certain types of broader impacts activities, whether women principal investigators are more likely to propose broader impacts, and the effect of grant size. This study demonstrates that cultural differences exist between scientific fields and also supports existing policy recommendations that encourage the creation of organizations and partnerships at university level to allow scientists to more easily participate in activities with broader impacts. Emphasizing broader impacts activities may also attract a more diverse scientific workforce, as many individuals do not pursue science because of a perceived lack of impact. © The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kamenetzky, J. R. (2013). Opportunities for impact: Statistical analysis of the national science foundation’s broader impacts criterion. Science and Public Policy, 40(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs059

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free