This study addressed the conceptualization of the societal impact of research from the perspective of programme evaluation, by focusing on the three 'result' elements of logic models: outputs, outcomes, and impact. In research evaluation, the distinction could resemble a difference between product, use, and benefit. The study established whether researchers in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), South Africa excluded, view societal impact as extending across all three elements or as confined to the last element only. A web survey of 485 SSA researchers was conducted, as researchers from this region are not yet bounded by policy definitions of impact. The survey imposed the three elements of logic models onto five hypothetical descriptions of 'impactful' research initiatives. Respondents rated each element in terms of how much it reflects the societal impact of research. For any initiative, use was more likely to be considered a strong example of societal impact compared to a product, but less likely so compared to benefit. Between 23% and 43% of respondents rated all three elements as strong examples of the societal impact of research. Responses were analyzed by SSA region and the research domain and years of research experience of survey participants. An open-ended question about own understandings of societal impact was included as well in the survey. The responses portrayed impact as a (generally) positive effect that contributes to change in the daily life of human kind. The expectation that research should have impact at an almost general level of aggregation could be unique to the SSA context.

中文翻译：

---

根据逻辑模型的要素概念化研究的社会影响：撒哈拉以南非洲研究人员的调查

这项研究通过关注逻辑模型的三个“结果”要素：产出，结果和影响，从程序评估的角度解决了研究的社会影响的概念化问题。在研究评估中，区别可能类似于产品，用途和收益之间的差异。该研究确定了南非的撒哈拉以南非洲地区（SSA）的研究人员是否排除了社会影响，认为其影响跨越了这三个要素，或者仅局限于最后一个要素。由于来自该地区的研究人员尚未受到影响的政策定义的限制，因此对485名SSA研究人员进行了网络调查。该调查将逻辑模型的三个要素强加于对“有影响力的”研究计划的五个假设描述。受访者对每个要素的评价程度反映了研究的社会影响。对于任何计划，与产品相比，使用更可能被视为社会影响的有力例证，但与收益相比则不太可能。在23％至43％的受访者中，所有这三个要素都将其视为研究的社会影响的有力例证。通过SSA地区和研究领域以及调查参与者的研究经验来分析回答。调查还包括一个关于自己对社会影响的理解的开放式问题。这些回应将影响描述为一种（通常）积极的影响，有助于改变人类的日常生活。对于研究应该在几乎总的聚合水平上产生影响的期望可能是SSA情况所独有的。