Industry

White House Memo Details Progress on SBS Development

September 30, 2022 1855

A memo released this month by the White House during its self-proclaimed “Tear of Evidence for Action” updated plans to ensure evidence-based social and behavioral research is used by the United States government. The memo outlines actions of the National Science and Technology Council’s Social and Behavioral Sciences Subcommittee (SBS) of the Committee on Science of the National Science and Technology Council, including a plan to advance evidence-based policymaking by April 2023.

The SBS was established for purpose including determining best practices for the use of social and behavioral science evidence in Federal policymaking and practices, improving research and development coordination, providing guidance to the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and identifying topics where social and behavioral science can be used to accomplish priorities. “The social and behavioral sciences,” the memo notes, “offer unique tools for describing, understanding, and addressing societal challenges, and assessing and evaluating initiatives, programs, and policies.

The subcommittee was decommissioned during the Trump administration, but the Biden administration formally rechartered SBS in April as part of the “Year of Evidence for Action” initiative. This initiative, co-chartered by the OSTP and the Office of Management and Budget, sought to increase collaboration between researchers and the government, share federal agencies’ leading practices to generate greater knowledge and expand strategies and structures to increase the capacity for evidence-backed policymaking.

The memo provides information about progress on the SBS’ first task, delivering a whole-of-government framework for the use of social and behavioral research in evidence-based policymaking by April 30, 2023. The SBS has established interagency working, groups, which are aimed at five of the administration’s focuses: accessibility of digital infrastructure and services; communicating hazard information and other types of uncertainty; decarbonization and justice; good jobs; and safely reducing criminal justice system interactions, improving rehabilitation during incarceration and enhancing Re-entry.

Additionally, several cross-cutting questions have been established to help guide the groups’ progress. These questions include an emphasis on preexisting research, established successful methods, current research on applicable topics in progress, possibilities of collaborative efforts, unique contributions the social and behavioral sciences have on topics of interest and identifying opportunities and barriers for research and its findings being implemented into policy outcomes.

Further information will be shared with the public as it is available.

Molly Gahagen is a third-year student at Johns Hopkins University studying political science and international studies. She is currently the social science communications intern at SAGE Publishing.

View all posts by Molly Gahagen

Related Articles

Why Social Science? Because It Makes an Outsized Impact on Policy
Industry
March 4, 2024

Why Social Science? Because It Makes an Outsized Impact on Policy

Read Now
The Importance of Using Proper Research Citations to Encourage Trustworthy News Reporting
Impact
February 26, 2024

The Importance of Using Proper Research Citations to Encourage Trustworthy News Reporting

Read Now
A Behavioral Scientist’s Take on the Dangers of Self-Censorship in Science
Interview
February 14, 2024

A Behavioral Scientist’s Take on the Dangers of Self-Censorship in Science

Read Now
SSRC Links with U.S. Treasury on Evaluation Projects
Announcements
February 1, 2024

SSRC Links with U.S. Treasury on Evaluation Projects

Read Now
New Report Finds Social Science Key Ingredient in Innovation Recipe

New Report Finds Social Science Key Ingredient in Innovation Recipe

A new report from Britain’s Academy of Social Sciences argues that the key to success for physical science and technology research is a healthy helping of relevant social science.

Read Now
Your Data Likely Isn’t Best Served in a Pie Chart

Your Data Likely Isn’t Best Served in a Pie Chart

Overall, it is best to use pie charts sparingly, especially when there is a more “digestible” alternative – the bar chart.

Read Now
Research Integrity Should Not Mean Its Weaponization

Research Integrity Should Not Mean Its Weaponization

Commenting on the trend for the politically motivated forensic scrutiny of the research records of academics, Till Bruckner argues that singling out individuals in this way has a chilling effect on academic freedom and distracts from efforts to address more important systemic issues in research integrity.

Read Now
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments