Towards a critical-conceptual analysis of ‘research culture’

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q2 GEOGRAPHY
Area Pub Date : 2023-10-03 DOI:10.1111/area.12905
Felicity Callard
{"title":"Towards a critical-conceptual analysis of ‘research culture’","authors":"Felicity Callard","doi":"10.1111/area.12905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Universities and policymakers increasingly use ‘research culture’ and ‘research environment’ to govern as well as describe research. Both terms help frame who is considered a research actor; how researchers interact with the contexts in which they make knowledge; and what is considered malleable when attempting to improve how research is done. There are very few conceptual-critical analyses of either term, even as each is a complex abstraction with rich and contested histories and usage. I explore both, largely using the example of the United Kingdom (where improving ‘research culture’ is currently prioritised by many funders, and will be assessed by the UK's Research Excellence Framework (REF) in 2028). Research culture has a close relationship with the concept organisational culture, which emerged in the late 1970s and 1980s and prioritised particular – frequently psychological – constructs that focused on the norms, values, and attitudes of an organisation. ‘Research labour’ – the labour relations that underpin how people work together and shape organisational norms, values, and relational dependencies – tends to drop from view. Geographers have much to offer these debates, given how extensively the discipline has contributed to what culture and environment might mean. Institutional, national, and sectoral policies concerning research culture and environment significantly shape how knowledge-making is understood and intervened on. The processes that ‘research culture’ and ‘research environment’ authorise and foreclose require greater examination.</p>","PeriodicalId":8422,"journal":{"name":"Area","volume":"56 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/area.12905","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Area","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/area.12905","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Universities and policymakers increasingly use ‘research culture’ and ‘research environment’ to govern as well as describe research. Both terms help frame who is considered a research actor; how researchers interact with the contexts in which they make knowledge; and what is considered malleable when attempting to improve how research is done. There are very few conceptual-critical analyses of either term, even as each is a complex abstraction with rich and contested histories and usage. I explore both, largely using the example of the United Kingdom (where improving ‘research culture’ is currently prioritised by many funders, and will be assessed by the UK's Research Excellence Framework (REF) in 2028). Research culture has a close relationship with the concept organisational culture, which emerged in the late 1970s and 1980s and prioritised particular – frequently psychological – constructs that focused on the norms, values, and attitudes of an organisation. ‘Research labour’ – the labour relations that underpin how people work together and shape organisational norms, values, and relational dependencies – tends to drop from view. Geographers have much to offer these debates, given how extensively the discipline has contributed to what culture and environment might mean. Institutional, national, and sectoral policies concerning research culture and environment significantly shape how knowledge-making is understood and intervened on. The processes that ‘research culture’ and ‘research environment’ authorise and foreclose require greater examination.

对 "研究文化 "进行批判性概念分析
大学和决策者越来越多地使用 "研究文化 "和 "研究环境 "来管理和描述研究。这两个词都有助于界定谁是研究参与者;研究人员如何与他们创造知识的环境互动;以及在试图改善研究方式时,哪些因素被认为是可塑的。对这两个术语的概念批判性分析都很少,尽管每个术语都是一个复杂的抽象概念,有着丰富而有争议的历史和用法。我主要以英国为例,对这两个术语进行了探讨(在英国,改善 "研究文化 "目前被许多资助者列为优先事项,并将在 2028 年由英国的 "卓越研究框架"(REF)进行评估)。研究文化与 20 世纪 70 年代末和 80 年代兴起的 "组织文化 "概念关系密切,"组织文 化 "概念优先考虑特定的--通常是心理的--结构,侧重于组织的规范、价值观和态度。而 "研究劳动"--即人们如何共同工作并形成组织规范、价值观和关系依赖的劳动关系--则往往被忽视。鉴于地理学对文化与环境的意义做出了广泛的贡献,地理学家在这些辩论中大有可为。有关研究文化与环境的机构、国家和部门政策在很大程度上决定了人们对知识创造的理解和干预方式。需要对 "研究文化 "和 "研究环境 "授权和禁止的过程进行更深入的研究。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Area
Area GEOGRAPHY-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
13.60%
发文量
80
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Area publishes ground breaking geographical research and scholarship across the field of geography. Whatever your interests, reading Area is essential to keep up with the latest thinking in geography. At the cutting edge of the discipline, the journal: • is the debating forum for the latest geographical research and ideas • is an outlet for fresh ideas, from both established and new scholars • is accessible to new researchers, including postgraduate students and academics at an early stage in their careers • contains commentaries and debates that focus on topical issues, new research results, methodological theory and practice and academic discussion and debate • provides rapid publication
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信