The t-test revealed that health sciences participants reported more coworker interactions about the COIP (M = 2.12, SD = .94) than non-health sciences participants (M = 1.79, SD = .74), t (203) = 2.87,p < .01.
Health sciences participants reported significantly higher levels of written instructions about the COIP (M = 2.27, SD = .90) than non-health sciences participants (M = 1.95, SD = .85), t (218) = 2.57,p < .05.
Health sciences participants reported significantly more personal expressions about the COIP (M = 2.04, SD = .94) than non-health sciences participants (M = 1.62, SD = .81), t (217) = 3.39,p = .001.
Hypothesis 2 predicted that differences would exist between groups for COIP knowledge.
There were no significant group differences for knowledge of the COIP scope (see Table 1).
Hypothesis 3 predicted that differences would exist between groups for COIP attitudes.
The goal of this study was to build on previous COIP research by theoretically investigating policy communication, knowledge, and attitudes across disciplines.
Health sciences researchers indicated that they communicated more about the COIP in all five modes than non-health sciences researchers.
This could be due to the fact that the COIP is not something researchers deal with on a daily basis.
Overall, however, it seems an SAT explanation for differences between health sciences and non-health sciences researchers increases our understanding of COIP processes in complex research organizations, such as universities, in several ways.