合著出版:巴西高产管理学者与不高产管理学者的动机比较

IF 0.4 Q4 MANAGEMENT
M. Ferreira, C. Falaster, Cláudia Sofia Frias Pinto, Renata Canela
{"title":"合著出版:巴西高产管理学者与不高产管理学者的动机比较","authors":"M. Ferreira, C. Falaster, Cláudia Sofia Frias Pinto, Renata Canela","doi":"10.13058/raep.2020.v21n2.1576","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we investigate what more and less prolific scholars – that publish more or less scientific articles – search for in their co-authorship ties. Specifically, we seek to understand if and how there are differences in the motivations presiding to co-authorship between more and less prolific researchers. Research on co-authorship is of interest to the academia, since the majority of the articles are published in co-authorship and co-authorships may have an important impact in the scholars’ career. We have collected survey data with 171 Brazilian management faculty, about their motivations, pressures, and choices for co-authorship. We identify significant differences on the perceived pressures to publish, source of pressure, motivations to work in co-authorship and the contributions warranting co-authorship across more and less prolific researchers. We contribute to the debate on the development of scholars and the formation of co-authorship ties, suggesting that co-authorship may be strategically managed and evolving along the professional path of the researchers, and leaving the possibility that scholars’ networks of co-authorship evolve strategically as they seek different goals.","PeriodicalId":53951,"journal":{"name":"Administracao-Ensino e Pesquisa","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Publishing in co-authorship: A comparison of the motivations between more and less prolific Management scholars in Brazil\",\"authors\":\"M. Ferreira, C. Falaster, Cláudia Sofia Frias Pinto, Renata Canela\",\"doi\":\"10.13058/raep.2020.v21n2.1576\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this study, we investigate what more and less prolific scholars – that publish more or less scientific articles – search for in their co-authorship ties. Specifically, we seek to understand if and how there are differences in the motivations presiding to co-authorship between more and less prolific researchers. Research on co-authorship is of interest to the academia, since the majority of the articles are published in co-authorship and co-authorships may have an important impact in the scholars’ career. We have collected survey data with 171 Brazilian management faculty, about their motivations, pressures, and choices for co-authorship. We identify significant differences on the perceived pressures to publish, source of pressure, motivations to work in co-authorship and the contributions warranting co-authorship across more and less prolific researchers. We contribute to the debate on the development of scholars and the formation of co-authorship ties, suggesting that co-authorship may be strategically managed and evolving along the professional path of the researchers, and leaving the possibility that scholars’ networks of co-authorship evolve strategically as they seek different goals.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administracao-Ensino e Pesquisa\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administracao-Ensino e Pesquisa\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13058/raep.2020.v21n2.1576\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administracao-Ensino e Pesquisa","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13058/raep.2020.v21n2.1576","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这项研究中,我们调查了发表或多或少科学文章的高产学者在他们的共同作者关系中寻找什么。具体来说,我们试图了解高产和低高产研究人员的合著动机是否存在差异,以及如何存在差异。共同作者身份的研究是学术界关注的问题,因为大多数文章都是以共同作者的身份发表的,而共同作者身份可能对学者的职业生涯产生重要影响。我们收集了171名巴西管理学院的调查数据,了解他们合作的动机、压力和选择。我们发现,在多多产和少多产的研究人员之间,在发表的感知压力、压力来源、合作的动机和值得合作的贡献方面存在显著差异。我们对学者的发展和共同作者关系的形成进行了讨论,认为共同作者关系可以沿着研究人员的职业道路进行战略性管理和发展,并留下了学者的共同作者网络在寻求不同目标时战略性发展的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Publishing in co-authorship: A comparison of the motivations between more and less prolific Management scholars in Brazil
In this study, we investigate what more and less prolific scholars – that publish more or less scientific articles – search for in their co-authorship ties. Specifically, we seek to understand if and how there are differences in the motivations presiding to co-authorship between more and less prolific researchers. Research on co-authorship is of interest to the academia, since the majority of the articles are published in co-authorship and co-authorships may have an important impact in the scholars’ career. We have collected survey data with 171 Brazilian management faculty, about their motivations, pressures, and choices for co-authorship. We identify significant differences on the perceived pressures to publish, source of pressure, motivations to work in co-authorship and the contributions warranting co-authorship across more and less prolific researchers. We contribute to the debate on the development of scholars and the formation of co-authorship ties, suggesting that co-authorship may be strategically managed and evolving along the professional path of the researchers, and leaving the possibility that scholars’ networks of co-authorship evolve strategically as they seek different goals.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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