粒子物理学的综合水平研究治理效应:比较分析

IF 2.9 4区 管理学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Research Evaluation Pub Date : 2023-09-27 DOI:10.1093/reseval/rvad025
Mayra M Tirado, Maria Nedeva, Duncan A Thomas
{"title":"粒子物理学的综合水平研究治理效应:比较分析","authors":"Mayra M Tirado, Maria Nedeva, Duncan A Thomas","doi":"10.1093/reseval/rvad025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper contributes to understanding the effects of research governance on global scientific fields. Using a highly selective comparative analysis of four national governance contexts, we explore how governance arrangements influence the dynamics of global research fields. Our study provides insights into second-level governance effects, moving beyond previous studies focusing primarily on effects on research organizations rooted in national contexts. Rather than study over 100 countries across which our selected CERN-based particle physics global research field operates, we explore conditions for changing the dynamics of global research fields and examine mechanisms through which change may occur. We predict then minimal effects on the epistemic choices and research practices of members of the four local knowledge networks despite variations in governance arrangements, and hence no second-level effects. We assert a research field’s independence from governance depends on its characteristics and the relative importance to researchers of research quality notions. This paper contributes methodologically and has practical implications for policymakers. It suggests governance arrangements affect the epistemic choices and research practices of the local knowledge networks only when certain conditions are met. Policymakers should consider the context and characteristics of a field when designing governance arrangements and policy.","PeriodicalId":47668,"journal":{"name":"Research Evaluation","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aggregate level research governance effects on particle physics: A comparative analysis\",\"authors\":\"Mayra M Tirado, Maria Nedeva, Duncan A Thomas\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/reseval/rvad025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper contributes to understanding the effects of research governance on global scientific fields. Using a highly selective comparative analysis of four national governance contexts, we explore how governance arrangements influence the dynamics of global research fields. Our study provides insights into second-level governance effects, moving beyond previous studies focusing primarily on effects on research organizations rooted in national contexts. Rather than study over 100 countries across which our selected CERN-based particle physics global research field operates, we explore conditions for changing the dynamics of global research fields and examine mechanisms through which change may occur. We predict then minimal effects on the epistemic choices and research practices of members of the four local knowledge networks despite variations in governance arrangements, and hence no second-level effects. We assert a research field’s independence from governance depends on its characteristics and the relative importance to researchers of research quality notions. This paper contributes methodologically and has practical implications for policymakers. It suggests governance arrangements affect the epistemic choices and research practices of the local knowledge networks only when certain conditions are met. Policymakers should consider the context and characteristics of a field when designing governance arrangements and policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47668,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"2 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad025\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvad025","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

摘要

本文有助于理解研究治理对全球科学领域的影响。通过对四个国家治理背景的高度选择性比较分析,我们探讨了治理安排如何影响全球研究领域的动态。我们的研究提供了对第二级治理效应的见解,超越了以往主要关注植根于国家背景的研究机构的影响的研究。我们不是研究我们选择的基于cern的粒子物理全球研究领域运作的100多个国家,而是探索改变全球研究领域动态的条件,并研究可能发生变化的机制。我们预测,尽管治理安排存在差异,但对四个地方知识网络成员的认知选择和研究实践的影响最小,因此没有第二级效应。我们认为,一个研究领域是否独立于治理取决于它的特点和研究质量观念对研究人员的相对重要性。本文在方法上有所贡献,对政策制定者具有实际意义。研究表明,只有在满足一定条件的情况下,治理安排才会影响地方知识网络的认知选择和研究实践。决策者在设计治理安排和政策时应该考虑一个领域的背景和特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Aggregate level research governance effects on particle physics: A comparative analysis
Abstract This paper contributes to understanding the effects of research governance on global scientific fields. Using a highly selective comparative analysis of four national governance contexts, we explore how governance arrangements influence the dynamics of global research fields. Our study provides insights into second-level governance effects, moving beyond previous studies focusing primarily on effects on research organizations rooted in national contexts. Rather than study over 100 countries across which our selected CERN-based particle physics global research field operates, we explore conditions for changing the dynamics of global research fields and examine mechanisms through which change may occur. We predict then minimal effects on the epistemic choices and research practices of members of the four local knowledge networks despite variations in governance arrangements, and hence no second-level effects. We assert a research field’s independence from governance depends on its characteristics and the relative importance to researchers of research quality notions. This paper contributes methodologically and has practical implications for policymakers. It suggests governance arrangements affect the epistemic choices and research practices of the local knowledge networks only when certain conditions are met. Policymakers should consider the context and characteristics of a field when designing governance arrangements and policy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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