{"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.
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.