Academics’ susceptibility to disruptions of their research productivity: empirical insights from the COVID-19 pandemic

IF 3.6 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Vitus Püttmann, Stephan L. Thomsen
{"title":"Academics’ susceptibility to disruptions of their research productivity: empirical insights from the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Vitus Püttmann, Stephan L. Thomsen","doi":"10.1007/s10734-024-01266-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The circumstances during the COVID-19 pandemic severely disrupted research activities, but did not affect all academics equally. Understanding which academics were susceptible to disruptions is essential for gauging and addressing the pandemic’s systemic consequences and can yield insights into influences on research productivity more generally. Based on the survey responses of 1891 university professors in Germany, we estimate multivariate models to investigate the relevance of a comprehensive set of factors that may have shaped the pandemic’s impact. We furthermore use sample splits and an econometric decomposition technique to analyze disciplinary and gender differences. Our findings show that some factors, including additional time demands for care responsibilities and negative spillovers from disruptions of teaching activities, are of general relevance, whereas the relevance of other factors varies between groups of academics. In the natural and engineering sciences, the dependence on access to research facilities seems to have led to a more uniform negative impact of the pandemic. This apparently rendered the work environment an important influence on academics’ susceptibility to disruptions. In the humanities and social sciences, where the pandemic’s impact was more heterogeneous, individual conditions such as seniority played a notable role. Most of these factors identified as relevant were furthermore more influential among female academics, who seem to experience greater challenges with shielding their research activities from disruptions. Overall, our investigation highlights the complexity of mechanisms worth taking into account for policy and management efforts concerned with academics’ research productivity, within and outside of the context of the pandemic.\n</p>","PeriodicalId":48383,"journal":{"name":"Higher Education","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Higher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01266-2","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The circumstances during the COVID-19 pandemic severely disrupted research activities, but did not affect all academics equally. Understanding which academics were susceptible to disruptions is essential for gauging and addressing the pandemic’s systemic consequences and can yield insights into influences on research productivity more generally. Based on the survey responses of 1891 university professors in Germany, we estimate multivariate models to investigate the relevance of a comprehensive set of factors that may have shaped the pandemic’s impact. We furthermore use sample splits and an econometric decomposition technique to analyze disciplinary and gender differences. Our findings show that some factors, including additional time demands for care responsibilities and negative spillovers from disruptions of teaching activities, are of general relevance, whereas the relevance of other factors varies between groups of academics. In the natural and engineering sciences, the dependence on access to research facilities seems to have led to a more uniform negative impact of the pandemic. This apparently rendered the work environment an important influence on academics’ susceptibility to disruptions. In the humanities and social sciences, where the pandemic’s impact was more heterogeneous, individual conditions such as seniority played a notable role. Most of these factors identified as relevant were furthermore more influential among female academics, who seem to experience greater challenges with shielding their research activities from disruptions. Overall, our investigation highlights the complexity of mechanisms worth taking into account for policy and management efforts concerned with academics’ research productivity, within and outside of the context of the pandemic.

Abstract Image

学术界对研究生产力中断的易感性:从 COVID-19 大流行病中获得的经验启示
COVID-19 大流行期间的情况严重干扰了研究活动,但并非所有学者都受到同样的影响。了解哪些学者容易受到干扰,对于衡量和应对大流行病的系统性后果至关重要,同时还能深入了解对研究生产力的影响。基于对德国 1891 名大学教授的调查回复,我们估算了多变量模型,以研究可能影响大流行病影响的一系列因素的相关性。此外,我们还利用样本分割和计量经济学分解技术分析了学科和性别差异。我们的研究结果表明,一些因素具有普遍意义,其中包括护理责任所需的额外时间和教学活动中断所产生的负面溢出效应,而其他因素的相关性则因学者群体的不同而各异。在自然科学和工程科学领域,对使用研究设施的依赖似乎导致了大流行病更为一致的负面影响。这显然使工作环境成为影响学者易受干扰的一个重要因素。在人文科学和社会科学领域,大流行病的影响较为分散,资历等个人条件发挥了显著作用。此外,大多数相关因素对女性学者的影响更大,她们在保护自己的研究活动不受干扰方面似乎遇到了更大的挑战。总之,我们的调查凸显了机制的复杂性,值得在大流行病背景内外制定与学者研究生产力相关的政策和管理工作时加以考虑。
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
Higher Education
Higher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
12.00%
发文量
160
期刊介绍: Higher Education is recognised as the leading international journal of Higher Education studies, publishing twelve separate numbers each year. Since its establishment in 1972, Higher Education has followed educational developments throughout the world in universities, polytechnics, colleges, and vocational and education institutions. It has actively endeavoured to report on developments in both public and private Higher Education sectors. Contributions have come from leading scholars from different countries while articles have tackled the problems of teachers as well as students, and of planners as well as administrators. While each Higher Education system has its own distinctive features, common problems and issues are shared internationally by researchers, teachers and institutional leaders. Higher Education offers opportunities for exchange of research results, experience and insights, and provides a forum for ongoing discussion between experts. Higher Education publishes authoritative overview articles, comparative studies and analyses of particular problems or issues. All contributions are peer reviewed.
×
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