--- tags: workshop2020 --- # SciBeh Virtual Workshop 1.2 ## Interfacing with Policy [Session whiteboard](http://bit.ly/scibeh-policy) | [Discussion forum](https://www.reddit.com/r/BehSciAsk/comments/jkzuig/ideas_for_discussion_how_can_research_interface/) Session overview: As scientists, we are used to the methodologies, outputs, and communication styles of our discipline. These academic norms allow us to communicate easily with other researchers, but to be crisis-relevant, knowledge needs to be disseminated to policy makers, journalists, and the wider public. This is not as simple as just making research open and accessible, although the principles of open science (e.g., transparency, rigour in reporting) still stand. To translate research into policy impact, we need to consider issues such as: What is the policy problem? (Which is not usually the same as a scientific problem!) What is the best format to communicate the research? (Bearing in mind that a public and policy audiences will not be familiar with the language of academic research.) What is the trade-off between publishing within the policy cycle and publishing a 'perfect' paper? After all: >[The best quality information available quickly is better than perfect information that can’t be accessed until it’s not helpful.](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02/completely-new-culture-doing-research-coronavirus-outbreak-changes-how-scientists) In this session, we seek to understand how the wider science community can be policy-relevant by asking questions such as: * What formats do policy makers and practitioners require? * What kind of outputs can we provide? * What ways could we crowd source expertise to synthesise, critique, and distill existing and new knowledge? * How do we tackle the challenge of short time frames in the policy cycle? * How do we avoid being ‘too political’ when communicating research? _Speakers:_ **[Alison Wright](https://www.ucl.ac.uk/pals/research/clinical-educational-and-health-psychology/research-groups/health-psychology-research-28)** is a senior research associate at UCL, leading the team of behavioural science researchers working on the [Human Behaviour Change](https://www.humanbehaviourchange.org/) project. In this session, she will talk about this project and its role in providing evidence about interventions to different users. **[Lindsey Pike](http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/people/person/lindsey-a-pike/)** is an Impact and Policy Engagement Manager and Policy Bristol Associate for the University of Bristol, and was a researcher on the [Evidence Information Service](https://www.bath.ac.uk/projects/evidence-information-service/) project. In this session, she will talk about the wider context of research and policy, and her experiences bridging the two. _Panellists:_ **[Paulina Lang](https://www.linkedin.com/in/paulina-lang-phd-87a23926/)** is a Behavioural Scientist in the Cabinet Office of the UK Government, with expertise in how policy-makers apply evidence in their work. **[Mirjam Jenny](https://www.hardingcenter.de/en/personen/mirjam-jenny)** leads the science communication unit at the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin, and is an expert in science and risk communication, (digital) risk literacy, risk communication, data science and algorithmic and medical decision making. **[Rachel McCloy](http://www.reading.ac.uk/psychology/about/staff/r-a-mccloy.aspx)** is Director of the [Centre for Applied Behavioural Science](http://www.reading.ac.uk/psychology/Research/cabs.aspx) at the University of Reading, with many years of experience working on behavioural change projects within Government and Industry, providing expertise to support evidence-based and evidence-driven policy. **[René van Bavel](https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/person/rene-van-bavel)** works at the European Commission's [Joint Research Centre (JRC)](https://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/joint-research-centre_en) on the application of behavioural insights to policy. Over the past 17 years he has contributed as a researcher and policy analyst to evidence-based EU policy-making. Prior to that he was a lecturer in social psychology. _Session chair_: **[Stephan Lewandowsky](http://www.cogsciwa.com/)** is Professor of Cognitive Science at the University of Bristol. His research interests revolve around misinformation, science denial, and the effects of technology on democracy.
Last changed by  
 
SciBeh
810

Read more

Active SciBeh projects

Here you will see SciBeh's current projects. If you would like to get involved with any of these, please contact the lead SciBeh team member listed, or email contact@scibeh.org and we will put you in touch with the right person. If you have an idea for a project that would benefit from collaboration, do get in touch! We are happy to help you lead a collective intelligence project with us. SciBeh Knowledge Base What's this project about? <span style=background-color:yellow>Here a description of what the knowledge base project is currently doing What can I get involved in? We welcome volunteers interested in: <span style=background-color:yellow>Add here</span>

3/28/2023
Vaccines concept map

Branching out Using current outline We need define node attributes on a separate line, I think. Ahh yes that cleans it up! I'm trying to see if vaccines at the top or vaccines at the centre looks better as a hierarchy. strict graph ip_map { "History"[URL = "https://scibeh.org"]

2/20/2023
Using the SciBeh Hypothes.is Knowledge Base

Video guide to SciBeh knowledge base You can watch the video below for a quick visual guide to using SciBeh's hypothes.is knowledge base. The video covers all the content covered below. About hypothes.is and the SciBeh knowledge base SciBeh maintains an eclectic knowledge base. Here you can find a wide range of items ranging from tweets, newspaper and blog articles, reports to preprints and peer-reviewed articles, all on the topic of behavioural science and responding to COVID-19. We use the tool hypothes.is to annotate each item in the knowledge base. This means that the curated items are tagged with key words, dates, and links to where the item has been referenced on the Internet. How the tool works SciBeh collects input from different sources: discussions on Twitter, Reddit, links sent to us by contributors. Our team of volunteers annotate all of these links---each volunteer annotates 100s each week!---using hypothes.is. When an item is annotated, it gets added to SciBeh's hypothes.is collection. That's the knowledge base you can search for COVID-19-related research and discussion. You can read more about the process of curating items for the knowledge here.

9/16/2022
manifesto documentation

Our process, in brief, has been: Workshop was held with notes taken by assistants. [I’m trying to find this---the SciBeh notion page got upgraded and so it’s moved!] We invited attendees to sign up as authors or CLAs, with the commitments laid out (specifically: minimally a paragraph of writing for authors) Three different structures proposed (Ulrike, Miso, Dawn). Miso + Dawn independently reviewed the workshop notes and highlighted relevant points. This is all the stuff in the initial outline after the << NEW STRUCTURE AFTER VOTING ENDS HERE >> line on the g-doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xbWN9BwfKz4bzRKt0KHc9GaFjOUsPqmh/edit CLAs had a meeting to discuss structure, based on this proposal after people had commented as a springboard for discussion: • Establishing the problems that require CI as a solution o Current platforms/channels & limitations o External forces (“landscape” of SciComm and actors involved)

6/24/2022
Read more from SciBeh
Published on HackMD