Volume 17, Issue 6 pp. 755-764
Review Article

‘The missing links’: understanding how context and mechanism influence the impact of public involvement in research

Kristina Staley PhD

Corresponding Author

Kristina Staley PhD

Co-Director

TwoCan Associates, Wallace House, Hove, UK

Correspondence

Kristina Staley PhD

TwoCan Associates

Wallace House

45 Portland Road

Hove

BN3 5DQ

UK

E-mail: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Sarah A. Buckland BSc

Sarah A. Buckland BSc

Director

INVOLVE Coordinating Centre, University of Leeds, Eastleigh, Hampshire, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Helen Hayes MSc

Helen Hayes MSc

Knowledge and Communications Manager

INVOLVE Coordinating Centre, University of Leeds, Eastleigh, Hampshire, UK

Search for more papers by this author
Maryrose Tarpey BSocSc., PGDipPSE

Maryrose Tarpey BSocSc., PGDipPSE

Research Manager

INVOLVE Coordinating Centre, University of Leeds, Eastleigh, Hampshire, UK

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 29 October 2012
Citations: 73

Abstract

Introduction

It is now more widely recognized that public involvement in research increases the quality and relevance of the research. However, there are also more questions as to exactly how and when involvement brings added value.

The nature of the current evidence of impact

Based on the findings of recent literature reviews, most reports of public involvement that discuss impact are based on observational evaluations. These usefully describe the context, the type of involvement and the impact. However, the links between these factors are rarely considered. The findings are therefore limited to identifying the range of impacts and general lessons for good practice. Reflecting on the links between context, mechanism and outcome in these observational evaluations identifies which aspects of the context and mechanism could be significant to the outcome. Studies that are more in line with the principles of realistic evaluation can test these links more rigorously. Building on the evidence from observational evaluations to design research that explores the ‘missing links’ will help to address the question ‘what works best, for whom and when’.

Conclusions

We conclude that a more intentional and explicit exploration of the links between context, mechanism and outcome, applying the principles of realistic evaluation to public involvement in research, should lead to a more sophisticated understanding of the factors that increase or decrease the likelihood of positive outcomes. This will support the development of more strategic approaches to involvement maximizing the benefits for all involved.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.