ABSTRACT
For many years prominent psychologists have argued for making psychological research more responsive to the needs of the general public (Bevan, 1980; Lewin, 1948; Miller, 1969). Justification for increasing the role of public interests in psychological research include scarcity of funds and funding priorities, humanitarian concerns for the betterment of humankind, and ethical concerns for “paying back” those who help us and fund us. Both the interests and rationales have led to some important changes in research emphases and priorities, especially in social psychology. There is a renewed vigor in applied social psychology and in evaluation research. This has resulted in a concern for the utilization of the research information obtained. In the area of evaluation research, a literature is developing on the factors that facilitate and inhibit the use of evaluation research by agency administrators and policy makers (Brown, 1981; Patton, 1978; Rothman, 1980; Weiss, 1971). Most of the emphasis on utilization has involved utilization by policy makers and agency administrators. Whereas this offers a promising avenue for reducing the gap between the scientist and the policy maker, it overlooks the relationship between social science and the general public. “What's in it for me?” is an implicit question being asked by individuals and groups who are requested to participate in research. This is a natural question. The payoffs of the scientific research process are fairly clear for the scientist (e.g., publications, promotions, the furthering of scientific knowledge), yet the payoffs for our subjects (respondents, participants) are not clear.
