University responsible research and innovation and society: dialogue or monologue?

Figures & data

Table 1. Sample distribution by area and type of research covered in the interviews.

Area	Type		Total
	Basic	Applied
Arts and humanities	3	6	9
Sciences	10	3	11
Social and legal sciences	14	18	32
Engineering and architecture	9	34	43
Health	3	7	10
Total	39	68	107

Figure 1. How and when SH participate in the research process according to the RG profiles.

Table 2. Level of SH participation in each research phase for each researcher profile (according to the score on the indicators. Minimum value: 2. Maximum value: 6).

Indicator	Profile
	Isolated	Disseminator	Transfer	Inclusive
Problem	2.52	2.47	5.06	5.71
Design	2.72	2.38	2.56	5.50
Data gathering	2.60	2.91	3.03	5.79
Data analysis	2.52	3.03	3.12	4.86
Dissemination	2.40	2.74	4.85	5.00
Channels	2.36	5.47	5.26	5.79
Exploitation	2.96	3.62	3.79	4.07

Figure 2. Scatter plot showing the distribution of the researchers, according to type of research and proposed dialogue type associated with their profile.

Table 3. Counting of RG according to type of participation and dialogue with SH.

Area	Type		Total
	Basic	Applied
Isolated (no communication)	24	8	32
Disseminator (monologue)	9	24	33
Transfer (instrumental dialogue)	6	25	31
Inclusive (deliberative dialogue)	0	11	11
Total	39	68	107

Table 4. Potential strategies for improving the conditions for a deliberative dialogue.

To improve	Potential strategies
Social commitment	Higher education institutions and research groups should promote responsible and committed research seeking practical solutions to contextual needs.
Relations between RG and SH	Universities should facilitate and recognise certain interest groups as collaborators or members of research groups. Researchers should recognise the knowledge, insights and viewpoints of stakeholders.
Participation	To favour research spaces or environments that are natural for the participants, in their profile and daily professional tasks that encourage dialogue and negotiation. Generate indicators that make it possible to monitor the quality of research in relation to the context and the process, and that these are, at the same time, permeated by participation and emancipatory ethics. Streamline the bureaucratic processes for raising funds for research and for obtaining permissions from the ethics committee.