تحلیل خودارزیابی اعضای هیئت علمی دانشگاه قم درباره اثرگذاری اجتماعی پژوهش‌ها: نقش ویژگی‌های فردی و سیاست‌های دانشگاهی

Abstract:

Purpose: In recent decades, the societal impact of research has emerged as a key dimension in evaluating the quality and effectiveness of scientific work. Accordingly, the present study aims to investigate the perceptions and self-assessments of faculty members at Qom University regarding the societal impact of their academic research. In addition, the study seeks to examine how contextual factors—such as age, gender, work experience, and academic discipline—as well as institutional policies (including promotion criteria, academic incentives, and research funding mechanisms) influence faculty members’ perceptions of the societal relevance and impact of their research.

Methodology: This study employed a quantitative approach using a survey method. The statistical population included all faculty members of Qom University (319 members at the time of the study). Considering practical limitations and based on power analysis, a purposive sample of 57 faculty members was selected to participate. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire whose content validity was confirmed by four experts in information science and sociology. The reliability of the instrument was assessed using a test-retest method with a one-week interval on a subset of 20 participants, yielding a correlation coefficient of 0.93. Data analysis included both descriptive statistics (mean, frequency, standard deviation) and inferential tests such as independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, and F-test.

Findings: The result of the study indicated that the average self-assessed societal impact of research among faculty members was 9.36 out of 15, reflecting a moderate level of confidence in the social influence of their academic work. Approximately half of the participants believed their research lacked tangible impact, with reported societal effects at the national and international levels at 33.3% and 12.3%, respectively. Notably, none of the respondents reported any impact at the local level. Only 22.8% of the research projects were perceived to have advanced to the stage of implementation or product development, while the majority remained at preliminary phases. Moreover, 55.9% of faculty members stated that their research had influenced only a specific group in society, and just 5.9% believed it had directly affected particular individuals. Although the practical application of research appeared limited, a significant majority (86%) of respondents believed their work contributed to enhancing public awareness or the application of knowledge in society. These findings suggest that while broad operational impact may be lacking, academic research has partially achieved its purpose in disseminating knowledge and raising public understanding.

The statistical analyses further revealed that there were no significant differences in the self-assessed societal impact of research based on academic departments or gender. However, a significant relationship was found between years of professional experience and the level of self-assessed impact; faculty members with more years of experience reported higher scores for the societal relevance of their research. Although differences in average scores across age groups were also observed, the results of the ANOVA test indicated that these differences were not statistically significant at the 95% confidence level (p = 0.076), though the result was close to the threshold of significance.



The findings also highlighted a low level of engagement with public dissemination methods such as newspapers, radio, or television. In contrast, 47.4% of the researchers reported using professional social networks like LinkedIn or ResearchGate to share their findings. This suggests that one of the key barriers to the societal impact of academic research lies in the limited effectiveness of knowledge transfer mechanisms aimed at reaching the general public.

Finally, the analysis of participants’ views on official university policies such as grant allocations, and publication incentives, revealed that the majority of faculty members did not consider these policies effective in enhancing the societal impact of academic research. However, self-assessment scores were significantly higher among those who perceived these policies as effective. This finding suggests that a positive attitude toward institutional support mechanisms is associated with a stronger sense of research impact. Consequently, revising and aligning university policies to better support societal engagement may play a crucial role in improving the social effectiveness of academic research.

Conclusion: The present study revealed that although faculty members exhibit a moderate level of belief in the societal impact of their research, this confidence remains limited and highly variable. The findings also pointed to the absence of effective mechanisms for disseminating research outcomes to the broader public and the ineffectiveness of existing institutional incentive policies in fostering stronger connections between academic research and societal needs. Based on these results, it is recommended that university policymakers reconsider current promotion criteria and research funding frameworks, placing greater emphasis on research quality and practical application. However, since the study was conducted on a limited sample from a single university, future research is encouraged to include larger and more diverse samples across multiple universities in Iran, in order to improve the generalizability of the findings and enable inter-university comparisons.