Tenure and research trajectories

IF 9.1 1区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
Giorgio Tripodi, Xiang Zheng, Yifan Qian, Dakota Murray, Benjamin F. Jones, Chaoqun Ni, Dashun Wang
{"title":"Tenure and research trajectories","authors":"Giorgio Tripodi, Xiang Zheng, Yifan Qian, Dakota Murray, Benjamin F. Jones, Chaoqun Ni, Dashun Wang","doi":"10.1073/pnas.2500322122","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tenure is a cornerstone of the US academic system, yet its relationship to faculty research trajectories remains poorly understood. Conceptually, tenure systems may act as a selection mechanism, screening in high-output researchers; a dynamic incentive mechanism, encouraging high output prior to tenure but low output after tenure; and a creative search mechanism, encouraging tenured individuals to undertake high-risk work. Here, we integrate data from seven different sources to trace US tenure-line faculty and their research outputs at a remarkable scale and scope, covering over 12,000 researchers across 15 disciplines. Our analysis reveals that faculty publication rates typically increase sharply during the tenure track and peak just before obtaining tenure. Post-tenure trends, however, vary across disciplines: In lab-based fields, such as biology and chemistry, research output typically remains high post-tenure, whereas in non-lab-based fields, such as mathematics and sociology, research output typically declines substantially post-tenure. Turning to creative search, faculty increasingly produce novel, high-risk research after securing tenure. However, this shift toward novelty and risk-taking comes with a decline in impact, with post-tenure research yielding fewer highly cited papers. Comparing outcomes across common career ages but different tenure years or comparing research trajectories in tenure-based and non-tenure-based research settings underscores that breaks in the research trajectories are sharply tied to the individual’s tenure year. Overall, these findings provide an empirical basis for understanding the tenure system, individual research trajectories, and the shape of scientific output.","PeriodicalId":20548,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","volume":"115 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2500322122","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Tenure is a cornerstone of the US academic system, yet its relationship to faculty research trajectories remains poorly understood. Conceptually, tenure systems may act as a selection mechanism, screening in high-output researchers; a dynamic incentive mechanism, encouraging high output prior to tenure but low output after tenure; and a creative search mechanism, encouraging tenured individuals to undertake high-risk work. Here, we integrate data from seven different sources to trace US tenure-line faculty and their research outputs at a remarkable scale and scope, covering over 12,000 researchers across 15 disciplines. Our analysis reveals that faculty publication rates typically increase sharply during the tenure track and peak just before obtaining tenure. Post-tenure trends, however, vary across disciplines: In lab-based fields, such as biology and chemistry, research output typically remains high post-tenure, whereas in non-lab-based fields, such as mathematics and sociology, research output typically declines substantially post-tenure. Turning to creative search, faculty increasingly produce novel, high-risk research after securing tenure. However, this shift toward novelty and risk-taking comes with a decline in impact, with post-tenure research yielding fewer highly cited papers. Comparing outcomes across common career ages but different tenure years or comparing research trajectories in tenure-based and non-tenure-based research settings underscores that breaks in the research trajectories are sharply tied to the individual’s tenure year. Overall, these findings provide an empirical basis for understanding the tenure system, individual research trajectories, and the shape of scientific output.
终身教职和研究轨迹
终身教职是美国学术体系的基石,但人们对其与教师研究轨迹的关系仍知之甚少。从概念上讲,终身教职制度可以作为一种选择机制,筛选高产出的研究人员;动态激励机制,鼓励任期前高产出、任期后低产出;创造性的搜索机制,鼓励终身教职员工承担高风险工作。在这里,我们整合了来自七个不同来源的数据,以惊人的规模和范围追踪美国终身教职员工及其研究成果,涵盖了15个学科的12,000多名研究人员。我们的分析显示,在获得终身教职期间,教师的发表率通常会急剧上升,并在获得终身教职之前达到峰值。然而,终身教职后的趋势因学科而异:在以实验室为基础的领域,如生物学和化学,研究产出通常在终身教职后保持较高水平,而在非实验室领域,如数学和社会学,研究产出通常在终身教职后大幅下降。教职员工在获得终身教职后,越来越多地进行新颖、高风险的研究,转向创造性研究。然而,这种向新颖性和冒险性的转变伴随着影响力的下降,终身职位后的研究产出的高被引论文越来越少。比较相同职业年龄但不同任期的研究结果,或者比较基于终身教职和非终身教职的研究轨迹,可以强调,研究轨迹的中断与个人的任期密切相关。总体而言,这些发现为理解终身教职制度、个人研究轨迹和科学产出形态提供了实证基础。
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
CiteScore
19.00
自引率
0.90%
发文量
3575
审稿时长
2.5 months
期刊介绍: The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), a peer-reviewed journal of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), serves as an authoritative source for high-impact, original research across the biological, physical, and social sciences. With a global scope, the journal welcomes submissions from researchers worldwide, making it an inclusive platform for advancing scientific knowledge.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信