Q-statement #// factor	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	Distinguishing statement for factor
1. Without clear terms of reference and an alert supervisory committee, scientific researchers and advisors would just ride their hobbyhorses	1	2	1	0	−1	2	0
2. Evidently, worthwhile policy ideas emerge from science; but scientists have no responsibility for their dissemination among or application by policy advising civil servants or politicians	−1	0	−4	−2	3	−3	−2	5
3. In our policy sector, civil servants, politically accountable administrators, and science-based advisers are in close contact with each other	−1	1	4	4	2	3	−1
4. It is in the nature of things that politics and science are incompatible activities	0	0	1	−1	0	−2	−1
5. No matter their differences, science and politics eventually serve a similar function: creating conditions for cooperation between people	−1	0	0	−1	1	2	4	7
6. When the chips are down, lay and practitioners’ knowledge have less value than scientific knowledge; therefore, they deserve no standing at the policy table	−3	−2	−3	−1	−4	−1	−1
7. Normative issues are outside science, and should be left to politics	−4	0	−1	3	−3	3	−4
8. As a scientist you ought to be aware of the margins of uncertainty around scientific knowledge; but one should leave it to politicians to decide how to deal with uncertainty	3	−3	−3	1	2	4	−2
9. ‘Unknown, unloved’ is certainly true for the relation between scientists and policymakers/politicians	3	0	3	1	3	2	−1
10. Politics and/or policy learn from science only by chance, if at all	−3	−1	−1	−2	−4	−3	−1
11. Depoliticizing an issue usually if beneficial; too often good policy advice is spoiled by politics	−1	2	1	1	1	−2	−3
12. It is admirable that scientists translate vague and inchoate political ideas and ideals into transparent models, and objectify them into measurable indicators	−2	0	1	0	4	1	1	5
13. In my field, one scientific discipline dominates; when researchers or advisers from other disciplines come up with different, sometimes contradictory, recommendations, most of the time they prove to be useless	0	−3	−2	2	0	−4	−1	4
14. Uncertainty should be reduced through use of quantitative analytical methods; if this proves to be impossible, you need to program more research to make progress	0	−2	0	1	−3	−1	−2
15. If you desire policy-oriented learning, you should design experiments	1	−4	2	3	4	0	2	2
16. ‘Policy-oriented learning’ is a ‘motherhood’ or ‘apple-pie’ concept: who could be against it, if only you may determine yourself what constitutes ‘learning’?	0	1	−1	0	2	0	1
17. Far-sighted scientists and technical specialists initiate developments that politics will only legitimize after the fact	0	0	2	2	−1	0	1
18. To have party platforms assessed by planning bureaus (scientific advisory agencies) is just too much!	0	−2	3	−4	−2	−3	0	3
19. It is only natural to observe civil servants collaborating with scientists; after all, research is a link in the chain of policy implementation	1	1	−2	2	2	1	2	3
20. It is not for nothing that scientific conflicts or inconsistencies frequently run parallel to boundaries between departments, agencies, or other bureaucratic units	1	−1	2	−1	−2	1	−3
21. Scientists and experts experience difficulties working for or in government, as government honors and needs their professional skills, but simultaneously demands their full loyalty	2	−3	1	0	−1	0	−2
22. Scientific knowledge should be seen as information that, when en where available, can be purchased at a reasonable price	−1	0	−2	0	−2	−1	−2
23. The client or principal defines what knowledge is relevant	0	−2	−3	−4	1	0	−3
24. Uncertainty reduction through the use of science or expertise is hardly possible; learning is a matter of trial-and-error in practice	−2	−3	−2	−3	−3	−1	3	7
25. The right relationship between politics/policy and science is one of agent and principal in a well-defined project	−2	1	−1	−4	0	−3	−3
26. In outsourcing research it is difficult to create a relationship of mutual trust	−1	−2	−1	0	−2	−2	−2
27. Mutual trust between politicians/policymakers and scientists/experts differs from case to case and needs continuous maintenance	3	0	4	3	1	4	3
28. Scientific experts and advisers are lawyers: their business is advocacy for political positions	−4	−4	−4	−3	−1	−4	0
29. Most of the time it is concepts, models or story lines originating in science that are the glue in political compromise, or the pragmatic ties holding coalitions together	1	−1	0	−1	3	0	1
30. In politics, normative issues emerge as infringements on vested interests	−3	1	0	4	−4	1	1
31. Normative issues are difficult to grasp; people discover values only in dialogue with or comparison to other people	2	2	3	1	2	3	3
32. Science and expertise have the political function of a ‘refrigerator’ for issues that, for some reason or another, are ‘too hot to handle’	0	0	1	1	2	2	2
33. In the competition between scientific disciplines, the most politically useful knowledge is the winner	4	2	2	0	−1	0	0
34. Uncertain knowledge defines the free decision space for political action	2	0	2	1	1	3	3
35. Uncertainty always finds its origin in normative and interpretive pluralism	−2	−2	0	−1	−2	0	4	7
36. Policymaking is about coping with, or dealing with problems so that they do not get out of hand	2	−1	−1	1	−1	−1	2
37. In public policy, learning is limited to instrumental, financial and organizational matters	−2	4	0	−2	−1	−1	−1	2
38. Politicians and policymakers correctly trust the common sense of experienced practitioners more than experts’ insights	−3	0	−2	−2	0	−1	1
39. Critical analysis and policy-oriented learning make political ideologies more rational—and less important	3	0	−4	2	0	1	0	3
40. There will always be a political struggle about values; and correspondingly, types of knowledge that align with, or deviate from political value systems	4	4	3	0	0	2	2
41. Dealing with uncertainty primarily is a matter of thorough and honest political debate	2	2	0	−3	1	1	0	4
42. To the extent politics and policy can be said to learn from science, this happens through spontaneous convergence between political and scientific debates	1	−1	0	−2	0	−2	−4