Research governance and the dynamics of science: A framework for the study of governance effects on research fields

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Research Evaluation Pub Date : 2022-08-19 DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvac028
M. Nedeva, Mayra M. Tirado, Duncan A. Thomas
{"title":"Research governance and the dynamics of science: A framework for the study of governance effects on research fields","authors":"M. Nedeva, Mayra M. Tirado, Duncan A. Thomas","doi":"10.1093/reseval/rvac028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article offers a framework for the study of research governance effects on scientific fields framed by notions of research quality and the epistemic, organizational, and career choices they entail. The framework interprets the contested idea of ‘quality’ as an interplay involving notion origins, quality attributes, and contextual sites. We mobilize the origin and site components, to frame organizational-level events where quality notions inform selections, or selection events. Through the dynamic interplay between notions selected at specific sites, we contend, local actors enact research quality cumulatively, by making choices that privilege certain notions over others. In this article, we contribute in four ways. First, we propose an approach to study research governance effects on scientific fields. Second, we introduce first- and second-level effects of research governance paving the way to identify mechanisms through which these different levels of effects occur. Third, we assert that interactions between research spaces and fields leading to effects occur in the context of research organizations, and at nine key selection events. Fourth, and lastly, we discuss an empirical test on an illustration case to demonstrate how this approach can be applied.","PeriodicalId":47668,"journal":{"name":"Research Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvac028","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article offers a framework for the study of research governance effects on scientific fields framed by notions of research quality and the epistemic, organizational, and career choices they entail. The framework interprets the contested idea of ‘quality’ as an interplay involving notion origins, quality attributes, and contextual sites. We mobilize the origin and site components, to frame organizational-level events where quality notions inform selections, or selection events. Through the dynamic interplay between notions selected at specific sites, we contend, local actors enact research quality cumulatively, by making choices that privilege certain notions over others. In this article, we contribute in four ways. First, we propose an approach to study research governance effects on scientific fields. Second, we introduce first- and second-level effects of research governance paving the way to identify mechanisms through which these different levels of effects occur. Third, we assert that interactions between research spaces and fields leading to effects occur in the context of research organizations, and at nine key selection events. Fourth, and lastly, we discuss an empirical test on an illustration case to demonstrate how this approach can be applied.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
研究治理与科学动态:研究治理对研究领域影响的框架
本文提供了一个框架来研究研究治理对科学领域的影响,其框架是研究质量的概念及其所带来的认知、组织和职业选择。该框架将有争议的“质量”概念解释为涉及概念起源、质量属性和上下文站点的相互作用。我们调动起源和地点组成部分,以制定组织级别的事件,其中质量概念为选择或选择事件提供信息。我们认为,通过在特定地点选择的概念之间的动态相互作用,当地行为者通过做出使某些概念优先于其他概念的选择,积累了研究质量。在本文中,我们从四个方面进行了贡献。首先,我们提出了一种研究治理对科学领域影响的方法。其次,我们介绍了研究治理的一级和二级效应,为确定产生这些不同水平效应的机制铺平了道路。第三,我们断言,导致效应的研究空间和领域之间的互动发生在研究组织的背景下,以及在九个关键的选择事件中。第四,也是最后一点,我们讨论了一个例证案例的实证检验,以证明如何应用这种方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Research Evaluation
Research Evaluation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
18.20%
发文量
42
期刊介绍: Research Evaluation is a peer-reviewed, international journal. It ranges from the individual research project up to inter-country comparisons of research performance. Research projects, researchers, research centres, and the types of research output are all relevant. It includes public and private sectors, natural and social sciences. The term "evaluation" applies to all stages from priorities and proposals, through the monitoring of on-going projects and programmes, to the use of the results of research.
期刊最新文献
Correction to: Methods for measuring social and conceptual dimensions of convergence science Correction to: Stated preference methods and STI policy studies: a foreground approach A tribute to our dearly departed colleague and friend: An introduction to the Special Issue in memory of Prof. Paul Benneworth The legal foundation of responsible research assessment: An overview on European Union and Italy The conflict of impact for early career researchers planning for a future in the academy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1