Impact

Impact in Action: Brett Heasman

January 2, 2019 2287

In the next few days Social Science Space will hear from five winners of Britain’s Economic and Social Science Research Council’s 2018 Impact Prize to learn how they built meaningfulness into their own research and how they measure impact more broadly. We start today with Brett Heasman, a PhD student in the Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science and winner of the Future Promise prize.

Could you briefly describe your research? When designing your research study, what did impact look like to you?

My research was interested in understanding how autistic people are perceived by non-autistic people, because this is a big part of the social barriers autistic people face in navigating the world (e.g. finding employment). Yet while there are many experiments designed to explore autism, there are comparatively fewer methods available for understanding how autistic people are perceived, especially in everyday relationships. I wanted to help develop a method that researchers could use to understand real-world relationships involving autistic people. So myself and Dr Alex Gillespie adapted a measure used in psychiatry called the Interpersonal Perception Method and we used this to compare perspectives of family members with their autistic relatives. Our impact was therefore methodological in terms of developing tools that others could use, but it was also empirical, contributing to our understanding of autism. Our study indicated that there may be unrealised social potential for autistic people since in the context of long-standing family relationships, autistic people were very accurate in imagining how they would be perceived by their family members, while family members themselves were not as accurate as they thought they were.

What advice would you offer to researchers seeking to generate impact through their own research?

My main advice for other researchers is remain open and receptive to the opportunity for intangible impacts you may not have planned from the beginning. Research is a journey of discovery, and while you may have an initial idea of what impact you would like to achieve when you start out, this should not prevent you from pursuing new opportunities in the course of your investigation. For example, I had not planned from the outset to create a public exhibition which allowed autistic people to share their perspectives on autism, but through dialogue with participants and communities I was interacting with I soon realised that a lack of autistic voices in the public domain was a key concern for autistic people who often feel misrepresented. I realised I had the resources (e.g. institutional affiliation, research network) to help build a platform that could address this issue in some way.

Should impact be the ultimate goal of research?

Across different disciplines impact can mean very different things, so it really depends on what is defined as impact. In my field of psychology, impact is often conceptualised in terms of a user-base, i.e. in terms of how many people are citing a paper, or using a particular theory. I think this can be quite a narrow idea of impact because it depends on what type of audiences you value. In my view the most meaningful knowledge is co-produced, and that means listening and working with people across discipline boundaries to cultivate dialogue that has much longer lasting effects than a single research paper. Yet this is not always easy to measure, at least in comparison to more quantitative user-base statistics. For me, the ultimate goal of research has to be more holistic, involving the development of networks of collaboration from which researchers are ideally placed to tackle real-world problems directly, and to draw upon the resources and expertise available to achieve their aims.

Where next for your research?

I think building tools that other researchers can use is important, because we need more diverse platforms to study and engage with people. To this end I have written a computer programme which is now publicly available which can be used by researchers to explore how different labels (e.g. diagnostic labels) affect social perception and behaviour during a task where participants have to navigate through a virtual maze. I am also finishing the development of an app in which a virtual version of myself presents lectures which can be augmented into different real world spaces. This app is important for accessibility since not everyone can attend university lectures. Having a virtual me that anyone in the world can watch and interact with in their own homes opens up the discussions I’m having to more people, especially those with disabilities. 


Read more

Heasman, B., & Gillespie, A. (2018). Perspective-taking is two-sided: Misunderstandings between people with Asperger’s syndrome and their family members. Autism, 22(6), 740-750. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361317708287

Related Articles

Canada’s Storytellers Challenge Seeks Compelling Narratives About Student Research
Communication
November 21, 2024

Canada’s Storytellers Challenge Seeks Compelling Narratives About Student Research

Read Now
Tom Burns, 1959-2024: A Pioneer in Learning Development 
Impact
November 5, 2024

Tom Burns, 1959-2024: A Pioneer in Learning Development 

Read Now
Alondra Nelson Named to U.S. National Science Board
Announcements
October 18, 2024

Alondra Nelson Named to U.S. National Science Board

Read Now
Viewing 2024 Economics Nobel Through Lens of Colonialism’s Impact on Institutions
Recognition
October 15, 2024

Viewing 2024 Economics Nobel Through Lens of Colonialism’s Impact on Institutions

Read Now
Research Assessment, Scientometrics, and Qualitative v. Quantitative Measures

Research Assessment, Scientometrics, and Qualitative v. Quantitative Measures

The creation of the Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) has led to a heated debate on the balance between peer review and evaluative metrics in research assessment regimes. Luciana Balboa, Elizabeth Gadd, Eva Mendez, Janne Pölönen, Karen Stroobants, Erzsebet Toth Cithra and the CoARA Steering Board address these arguments and state CoARA’s commitment to finding ways in which peer review and bibliometrics can be used together responsibly.

Read Now
Paper to Advance Debate on Dual-Process Theories Genuinely Advanced Debate

Paper to Advance Debate on Dual-Process Theories Genuinely Advanced Debate

Sage 987 Impact

Psychologists Jonathan St. B. T. Evans and Keith E. Stanovich have a history of publishing important research papers that resonate for years.

Read Now
Webinar: Fundamentals of Research Impact

Webinar: Fundamentals of Research Impact

Whether you’re in a research leadership position, working in research development, or a researcher embarking on their project, creating a culture of […]

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
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments