Display options
Cite
Crowley DM, Scott JT, Long EC, et al. Lawmakers' use of scientific evidence can be improved. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021;118(9)doi: 10.1073/pnas.2012955118.
Crowley, D. M., Scott, J. T., Long, E. C., Green, L., Israel, A., Supplee, L., Jordan, E., Oliver, K., Guillot-Wright, S., Gay, B., Storace, R., Torres-Mackie, N., Murphy, Y., Donnay, S., Reardanz, J., Smith, R., McGuire, K., Baker, E., Antonopoulos, A., McCauley, M., & Giray, C. (2021). Lawmakers' use of scientific evidence can be improved. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(9), . https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012955118
Crowley, D Max, et al. "Lawmakers' use of scientific evidence can be improved." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America vol. 118,9 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2012955118
Crowley DM, Scott JT, Long EC, Green L, Israel A, Supplee L, Jordan E, Oliver K, Guillot-Wright S, Gay B, Storace R, Torres-Mackie N, Murphy Y, Donnay S, Reardanz J, Smith R, McGuire K, Baker E, Antonopoulos A, McCauley M, Giray C. Lawmakers' use of scientific evidence can be improved. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Mar 02;118(9). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2012955118. PMID: 33593938; PMCID: PMC7936366.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Mar 02;118(9). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2012955118.

Lawmakers' use of scientific evidence can be improved.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

D Max Crowley, J Taylor Scott, Elizabeth C Long, Lawrie Green, Azaliah Israel, Lauren Supplee, Elizabeth Jordan, Kathryn Oliver, Shannon Guillot-Wright, Brittany Gay, Rachel Storace, Naomi Torres-Mackie, Yolanda Murphy, Sandra Donnay, Jenna Reardanz, Rebecca Smith, Kristina McGuire, Elizabeth Baker, Ana Antonopoulos, Mary McCauley, Cagla Giray

Affiliations

  1. Evidence-to-Impact Collaborative, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802; [email protected].
  2. Evidence-to-Impact Collaborative, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802.
  3. Child Trends, Bethesda, MD 20814.
  4. Transforming Evidence, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, WC1H 9SR, United Kingdom.
  5. Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77550.
  6. Center for Violence Prevention, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77550.
  7. Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, MD21250.
  8. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027.
  9. The Racial Equity Initiative, Skillman, NJ 08558.
  10. Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0348.
  11. Department of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA 23238.
  12. Department of Psychology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4.
  13. Georgetown University Medical School, Washington, DC20007.

PMID: 33593938 PMCID: PMC7936366 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2012955118

Abstract

Core to the goal of scientific exploration is the opportunity to guide future decision-making. Yet, elected officials often miss opportunities to use science in their policymaking. This work reports on an experiment with the US Congress-evaluating the effects of a randomized, dual-population (i.e., researchers and congressional offices) outreach model for supporting legislative use of research evidence regarding child and family policy issues. In this experiment, we found that congressional offices randomized to the intervention reported greater value of research for understanding issues than the control group following implementation. More research use was also observed in legislation introduced by the intervention group. Further, we found that researchers randomized to the intervention advanced their own policy knowledge and engagement as well as reported benefits for their research following implementation.

Keywords: Congress; evidence-based policymaking; randomized controlled trial

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interest.

References

  1. Am J Prev Med. 2006 Feb;30(2):164-72 - PubMed
  2. Prev Sci. 2018 Feb;19(2):260-270 - PubMed
  3. BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Jan 03;14:2 - PubMed
  4. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2019;89(4):434-441 - PubMed
  5. Science. 2020 Feb 14;367(6479):723-724 - PubMed
  6. Fam Relat. 2009 Mar 26;58(2):229-243 - PubMed
  7. Am Psychol. 2019 Oct;74(7):778-793 - PubMed
  8. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Jan 17;15(1):1 - PubMed
  9. Health Res Policy Syst. 2014 Jul 14;12:34 - PubMed
  10. Milbank Q. 2010 Dec;88(4):444-83 - PubMed

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support