解开当地语境——想象的社区和研究者的归属感

IF 2.6 4区 管理学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Serge Horbach, M. P. Sørensen, N. Allum, A. Reid
{"title":"解开当地语境——想象的社区和研究者的归属感","authors":"Serge Horbach, M. P. Sørensen, N. Allum, A. Reid","doi":"10.1093/scipol/scad017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n It is generally agreed that researchers’ ‘local context’ matters to the successful implementation of research integrity policies. However, it often remains unclear what the relevant local context is. Is it the institutions and immediate working surroundings of researchers? Or, do we need to pay more attention to researchers’ epistemic communities if we want to understand their ‘local context’? In this paper, we examine this question by using the International Research Integrity Survey with more than 60,000 respondents. Survey responses indicate that academics identify with both their geographical local units (‘polis’) and their more transnational epistemic or scholarly communities (‘cosmos’). Identification with scholarly communities tends to be strongest. We embed the survey results in the academic literature by proposing a theoretical understanding of academics’ ‘local context’ based on Beck’s notion of cosmopolitanism and Durkheim’s concept of solidarity. We conclude with considerations on how to successfully implement research integrity policies.","PeriodicalId":47975,"journal":{"name":"Science and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disentangling the local context—imagined communities and researchers’ sense of belonging\",\"authors\":\"Serge Horbach, M. P. Sørensen, N. Allum, A. Reid\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/scipol/scad017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n It is generally agreed that researchers’ ‘local context’ matters to the successful implementation of research integrity policies. However, it often remains unclear what the relevant local context is. Is it the institutions and immediate working surroundings of researchers? Or, do we need to pay more attention to researchers’ epistemic communities if we want to understand their ‘local context’? In this paper, we examine this question by using the International Research Integrity Survey with more than 60,000 respondents. Survey responses indicate that academics identify with both their geographical local units (‘polis’) and their more transnational epistemic or scholarly communities (‘cosmos’). Identification with scholarly communities tends to be strongest. We embed the survey results in the academic literature by proposing a theoretical understanding of academics’ ‘local context’ based on Beck’s notion of cosmopolitanism and Durkheim’s concept of solidarity. We conclude with considerations on how to successfully implement research integrity policies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47975,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad017\",\"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":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad017","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

人们普遍认为,研究人员的“当地背景”对研究诚信政策的成功实施很重要。然而,人们往往不清楚相关的当地背景是什么。是研究人员的机构和直接工作环境吗?或者,如果我们想了解研究人员的“当地背景”,我们是否需要更多地关注他们的认知社区?在本文中,我们通过使用超过60,000名受访者的国际研究诚信调查来研究这个问题。调查结果表明,学者既认同他们的地理本地单位(“城邦”),也认同他们更跨国的认知或学术社区(“宇宙”)。与学术团体的认同感往往是最强的。我们基于贝克的世界主义概念和迪尔凯姆的团结概念,提出了对学术界“地方语境”的理论理解,将调查结果嵌入学术文献中。最后,我们考虑了如何成功地实施研究诚信政策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Disentangling the local context—imagined communities and researchers’ sense of belonging
It is generally agreed that researchers’ ‘local context’ matters to the successful implementation of research integrity policies. However, it often remains unclear what the relevant local context is. Is it the institutions and immediate working surroundings of researchers? Or, do we need to pay more attention to researchers’ epistemic communities if we want to understand their ‘local context’? In this paper, we examine this question by using the International Research Integrity Survey with more than 60,000 respondents. Survey responses indicate that academics identify with both their geographical local units (‘polis’) and their more transnational epistemic or scholarly communities (‘cosmos’). Identification with scholarly communities tends to be strongest. We embed the survey results in the academic literature by proposing a theoretical understanding of academics’ ‘local context’ based on Beck’s notion of cosmopolitanism and Durkheim’s concept of solidarity. We conclude with considerations on how to successfully implement research integrity policies.
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.
×
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