CONFERENCE FEATURE: Researching Society

Yesterday afternoon the MRS Conference in London saw public sector researchers discussing the ever-growing policy challenges with which research can help. Endangered species? Our News Editor Mel Crowther thinks not.

A year ago, social researchers had genuine concerns about their future in the wake of threatened cuts in government spend. But 12 months later, TNS-BMRB CEO Michelle Harrison believes that social research is still at the heart of policy making.

Even though the challenges facing society and government have never been greater - how to fund long-term care, how to deliver the welfare state, how to support electoral democracy - Harrison says that social researchers are still demonstrating a real commitment to improving public life.

First up on the podium was Ipsos MORI Senior Researcher Jerry Latter, who told us about a programme of 'non research' qualitative work his firm had recently carried out in partnership with Your Square Mile (YSM); a non-profit organisation which helps individuals across the country share ideas on how to improve their neighbourhoods. Community workshops were held with local residents in sixteen deprived areas of the UK, aged between 29 and 80. Just £10 was given each as an incentive, in order to only attract those with a genuine interest in improving their local area.

The agency was appointed to 'get things moving' but took the unusual step of handing group moderation over to the participants. Nevertheless the groups were never short of ideas or lacking in momentum - the key, Latter said, was to give the event a structure so that the participants could systematically think through the issues and solutions.

A number of common themes emerged across the workshops - as shown in the 'wordle' on the right (not sure about these myself - Ed.).

Most people wanted some sort of place where they could come together, such as a community centre. They also wanted more information about existing community activities and programmes taking place across the country. Latter and his colleagues had the role of choosing from participant ideas for new initiatives, from trout farms to 'Greet a Granny', and helping them think about how to get started. YSM will stay in touch with the groups to see how they are getting on, and the organisation has now launched an area of its web site, through which residents across the UK can share ideas, stories and best practice.

A more sobering presentation was delivered by TNS-BMRB Senior AD Becky Seale, about the lack of funding which will be available to pay for our social care in the future. According to government predictions, by 2031 the proportion of people aged 65+ will be around 25%, and there will not be enough money to fund the increasing number of people in this age bracket who will need care.

Confusion exists around how the current system works, with people believing this area of healthcare is financed by the NHS, when in fact in England the state only pays for people who have assets of less than £23k.

So, the government-backed Dilnot Commission - which provides an independent review of the funding of social care in Britain - invited TNS-BMRB to conduct a national policy analysis programme, to look into the views of the general public around how care and support should be funded in the future.

Workshops, group discussions and face-to-face interviews were conducted with almost 200 people, with different techniques used for different age groups. For instance, those in the 75+ bracket were involved in shorter group sessions, while younger groups were invited to participate in online forums. Seale says that this mixed method produced 'rich and varied' output.

Significant variation was found in individuals' awareness of what care and support is and how it is currently funded. People were generally enthusiastic about finding a workable solution to the funding issues, but while they accused the government of wanting to change the goal posts, when provided with a clear statement explaining the funding issues, participants accepted that change would be necessary.

Finally, Phillip Cowley, who is Professor of Parliamentary Government at the University of Nottingham, shared the secret of how to design the perfect politician. Working with Joe Twyman of YouGov, the professor explored desirable candidate characteristics using hypothetical biographies. The idea was to test the degree to which different traits impact on how approachable, experienced and effective individuals are perceived to be.

In the first wave of the study, participants in YouGov's daily polls were asked to choose between two similar male candidates - John and George. Although results were comparable, when John's name was changed to Sarah, it was found that the candidate was perceived as being less experienced, but more approachable, even though nothing else had been changed in the biography.

When George was billed as a 'politico' who had studied politics at uni, worked for an MP, and become a local councillor, John became the more popular candidate. But when George became a GP, he was instantly perceived as being more approachable.

Then following a change in George's profile to show he had moved to his constituency two years ago, his popularity rating soared, but this dropped by 30 points when he was shown to live 120 miles away, but willing to move to the district. Even when George was presented as a GP living 120 miles away, John's lead increased.

A fascinating piece of research, but how to make best use of the results? Obviously candidates can study it and change the way they position themselves; move house, or even plan their careers differently with future election in mind. Or they could lie - now there's a concept, politicians not telling the truth. Or let's face it we could go out and find people who match all the most sought-after characteristics, and put them forward as candidates - or simply, having already incorporated the element of voter opinion in our research, nominate them as future leaders. Then the only problem would be the gap between what people think they want, and what they end up liking - and it may take more than research to solve that one.