Over the past two decades, several methods have been developed to evaluate the societal impact of research. Compared to the practical development of the field, the conceptual development is relatively weak. This review article contributes to the latter by elucidating the theoretical aspects of the dominant methods for evaluating societal impact of research, in particular, their presuppositions about the relationship between scientific and societal value of research. We analyse 10 approaches to the assessment of the societal impact of research from a constructivist perspective. The methods represent different understandings of knowledge exchange, which can be understood in terms of linear, cyclical, and co-production models. In addition, the evaluation methods use a variety of concepts for the societal value of research, which suggest different relationships with scientific value. While some methods rely on a clear and explicit distinction between the two types of value, other methods, in particular Evaluative Inquiry, ASIRPA, Contribution Mapping, Public Value Mapping, and SIAMPI, consider the mechanisms for producing societal value integral to the research process. We conclude that evaluation methods must balance between demarcating societal value as a separate performance indicator for practical purposes and doing justice to the (constructivist) science studies’ findings about the integration of scientific and societal value of research. Our analytic comparison of assessment methods can assist research evaluators in the conscious and responsible selection of an approach that fits with the object under evaluation. As evaluation actively shapes knowledge production, it is important not to use oversimplified concepts of societal value.

中文翻译：

---

研究评价中科学和社会价值的产生：社会影响评价方法综述

在过去的二十年里，已经开发了几种方法来评估研究的社会影响。与该领域的实际发展相比，概念上的发展相对薄弱。这篇评论文章通过阐明评估研究的社会影响的主要方法的理论方面，特别是它们对研究的科学价值与社会价值之间关系的假设，对后者做出了贡献。我们从建构主义的角度分析了 10 种评估研究的社会影响的方法。这些方法代表了对知识交换的不同理解，可以从线性、循环和共同生产模型的角度来理解。此外，评价方法对研究的社会价值使用了多种概念，这表明与科学价值的不同关系。虽然一些方法依赖于两种价值类型之间的明确区分，但其他方法，特别是评估性调查、ASIRPA、贡献映射、公共价值映射和 SIAMPI，考虑了产生社会价值的机制，这些机制是研究过程不可或缺的。我们得出的结论是，评估方法必须在将社会价值划分为实际目的的单独绩效指标与公正（建构主义）科学研究关于整合科学价值和社会价值的研究结果之间取得平衡。我们对评估方法的分析比较可以帮助研究评估者有意识和负责任地选择适合评估对象的方法。