Skip to main content Skip to main navigation Skip to page-level navigation Go to the Disability Resource Centre Website Go to the DRC Booking Accommodation Portal Go to the Inclusive Technology Lab Website
The University of British Columbia
The University of British Columbia Okanagan campus
UBC Okanagan News
  • Research
  • People
    • Student Profile
    • Faculty Profile
    • Alumni Spotlight
  • Campus Life
    • Campus News
    • Student Life
    • Teaching & Learning
  • Community Engagement
  • About the Collection
    • Stories for Media
  • UBCO Events
  • Search All Stories
Home / 2016 / July / 22 / Do think-tanks matter? A UBC professor says ‘think again’
Policy & Social Change, Research

Do think-tanks matter? A UBC professor says ‘think again’

July 22, 2016

Carey Doberstein, assistant professor of political science

Carey Doberstein, assistant professor of political science

A UBC professor is suggesting government policy makers and advisors need to do a re-think when it comes to giving validity to reports coming across their desks.

Carey Doberstein, an assistant professor of political science at UBC’s Okanagan campus, recently published an experimental study of public sector workers and determined that many give a written report or study purported to be from a university more credibility than one from a think-tank or advocacy group.

Doberstein conducted a randomized controlled survey experiment involving British Columbia public service staff, asking them to read and assess the credibility of various policy studies. For half of the respondents, the authorship of the studies was randomly switched but the content remained the same.

Doberstein then compared the average credibility assessments between the control and experimental groups.

“There were systematic and at times extraordinarily large differences between the credibility assessments provided by these policy professionals on precisely the same policy studies, when the only part I changed was the label of who wrote it,” says Doberstein. “Irrespective of the content and just by virtue of presenting it as written by an academic, the report suddenly becomes more credible in the eyes of bureaucrats.”

The results surprised him, in part due to the magnitude of the differences observed. For one report, originally authored by the Fraser Institute, the credibility skyrocketed among study participants when they read the same document thinking it came from a university academic.

Another policy study, this time written by a university economist, received very high credibility assessments in the control group. But when authorship was changed to be purportedly written by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives think-tank, its credibility plummeted dramatically.

“Put simply, the think-tank affiliation was a significant drag on the perceived credibility of their report and analysis,” says Doberstein.

The same was true for reports said to be written by research-based advocacy groups.

“Some may interpret this finding positively,” he says. “That analysts in government are skeptical of reports or studies that emerge from think tanks or advocacy organizations offering analysis and conclusions that tend to align with the organization’s obvious ideological position.”

Yet Doberstein says having a report’s credibility increase simply by changing the name of the source is concerning as it can appear that policy-relevant research contained within its pages is being ignored by government policy advisors.

“We expect public servants to objectively examine the research evidence available to them,” he says. “However, it seems many are taking shortcuts, and in essence giving academics a free pass.”

And while this study examined the biases among policymakers in BC, Doberstein notes similar results were observed his subsequent replication experiment involving provincial policy analysts in Ontario, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland.

Doberstein’s study was recently published in Policy Studies Journal (onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/psj.12166/abstract)

—30—

Media Contact

Patty Wellborn
E-mail: patty.wellborn@ubc.ca

Content type: Media Release
More content from: Economics, Philosophy and Political Science, Faculty of Management, Irving K Barber School of Arts and Sciences (prior July 2020)

Trending Stories

  • How one student connects AI innovation to wildfire research
  • Putting community, students and research on the same track
  • Psychedelic mushroom microdoses can improve mood, mental health
  • Robotics, AI advancing wildfire, agricultural research at UBCO
  • UBCO professor researches electric passenger light rail for Okanagan Valley
All Stories
Contact Media Relations

About UBC Okanagan

UBC’s Okanagan campus is an innovative hub for research and learning founded in partnership with local Indigenous peoples, the Syilx Okanagan Nation, in whose traditional, ancestral and unceded territory the campus resides. The most established and influential global rankings all consistently place UBC in the top five per cent of universities in the world, and among the top three Canadian universities.

The Okanagan campus combines a globally recognized UBC education with a tight-knit and entrepreneurial community that welcomes students and faculty from around the world in British Columbia’s stunning Okanagan Valley. For more visit ok.ubc.ca.

Discover more about UBC Okanagan

Find a Program Admissions Book a Tour UBCO Facts
UBC Okanagan Campus News, University Relations

Innovation Precinct Annexation 1 (IA1)
3505 Spectrum Court
Kelowna, BC Canada V1V 2Z1

We respectfully acknowledge the Syilx Okanagan Nation and their peoples, in whose traditional, ancestral, unceded territory UBC Okanagan is situated.

 

Search all stories

Subscribe to receive news by email

Visit UBC's Vancouver news room

Global and Admin Messages

News

Okanagan Campus

TikTok icon Linkedin icon

UBC Okanagan News
Okanagan Campus
3333 University Way
Kelowna, BC Canada V1V 1V7
Find us on
  
Back to top
The University of British Columbia
  • Emergency Procedures |
  • Terms of Use |
  • Copyright |
  • Accessibility