科学选择的微观动力学:公共事务学者的研究项目动机

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Science and Public Policy Pub Date : 2023-10-12 DOI:10.1093/scipol/scad059
John P Nelson
{"title":"科学选择的微观动力学:公共事务学者的研究项目动机","authors":"John P Nelson","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Academic researchers’ choices about research projects to pursue are an important mechanism in societal allocation of research effort. It is unclear whether researchers’ criteria for project choice align with those articulated by policy scholars and philosophers. Many potential criteria for project choice are commonly discussed in scholarly and popular literature, but they have been little studied on the individual level. I review and catalog such potential criteria and then empirically explore researcher motivations for project choice through factor analysis of survey data from 409 authors of research articles in major public administration and public policy journals. I find empirical support for personal gain, societal importance, and intellectual interest as research motivations. These motivations do not neatly align with proposed ideal criteria for scientific choice. Thus, such criteria must be translated to speak to researchers’ personal interests to achieve expression in individual scientific choice.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The micro-dynamics of scientific choice: research project motivations among public affairs academics\",\"authors\":\"John P Nelson\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/scipol/scad059\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Academic researchers’ choices about research projects to pursue are an important mechanism in societal allocation of research effort. It is unclear whether researchers’ criteria for project choice align with those articulated by policy scholars and philosophers. Many potential criteria for project choice are commonly discussed in scholarly and popular literature, but they have been little studied on the individual level. I review and catalog such potential criteria and then empirically explore researcher motivations for project choice through factor analysis of survey data from 409 authors of research articles in major public administration and public policy journals. I find empirical support for personal gain, societal importance, and intellectual interest as research motivations. These motivations do not neatly align with proposed ideal criteria for scientific choice. Thus, such criteria must be translated to speak to researchers’ personal interests to achieve expression in individual scientific choice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad059\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad059","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学术研究者对研究项目的选择是科研成果社会配置的一个重要机制。目前尚不清楚研究人员的项目选择标准是否与政策学者和哲学家所阐述的标准一致。许多潜在的项目选择标准通常在学术和流行文献中讨论,但很少在个人层面上进行研究。我对这些潜在的标准进行了回顾和分类,然后通过对主要公共管理和公共政策期刊上409名研究文章作者的调查数据进行因子分析,实证地探索了研究人员选择项目的动机。我找到了个人利益、社会重要性和智力兴趣作为研究动机的实证支持。这些动机并不完全符合科学选择的理想标准。因此,这些标准必须被翻译成与研究人员的个人兴趣对话,以实现个人科学选择的表达。
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
The micro-dynamics of scientific choice: research project motivations among public affairs academics
Abstract Academic researchers’ choices about research projects to pursue are an important mechanism in societal allocation of research effort. It is unclear whether researchers’ criteria for project choice align with those articulated by policy scholars and philosophers. Many potential criteria for project choice are commonly discussed in scholarly and popular literature, but they have been little studied on the individual level. I review and catalog such potential criteria and then empirically explore researcher motivations for project choice through factor analysis of survey data from 409 authors of research articles in major public administration and public policy journals. I find empirical support for personal gain, societal importance, and intellectual interest as research motivations. These motivations do not neatly align with proposed ideal criteria for scientific choice. Thus, such criteria must be translated to speak to researchers’ personal interests to achieve expression in individual scientific choice.
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: Science and Public Policy is a leading refereed, international journal on public policies for science, technology and innovation, and on their implications for other public policies. It covers basic, applied, high, low, and any other types of S&T, and rich or poorer countries. It is read in around 70 countries, in universities (teaching and research), government ministries and agencies, consultancies, industry and elsewhere.
期刊最新文献
Diversity and directionality: friends or foes in sustainability transitions? Morality policy at the frontier of science: legislators’ views on germline engineering Regulatory agencies as innovation enablers: a conceptualization The impact of winning funding on researcher productivity, results from a randomized trial Operation warp speed: Harbinger of American industrial innovation policies
×
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