How scientists can optimise their impact on pressing societal problems: Commentary on Chater and Loewenstein (2022)’s argument for research on systemic change

In a recent contribution to Brain and Behavioral Sciences, Chater and Loewenstein (2022) argue that researchers can increase their societal impact by addressing behavioural research topics relevant to systemic change (i.e., “s-frame”) rather than research on individual change (i.e., “i-frame”). By swinging the pendulum back from overly relying on i-frames, we expect their call to be influential among researchers interested in having a positive societal impact. The present commentary discusses their contributions in the light of the assertion that the cause a researcher addresses is a major determinant of the potential societal impact of research. We argue that large-scale but neglected problems can yield highly effective s- and i-frame research topics, and the distinction between i- and s-frames could yield a helpful complementary heuristic for choosing research topics that address the most pressing societal problems.