Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: research preference, collaboration, and time on research

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study developed a multilevel model of academic publishing and tested the effects of several predictors on faculty publishing. In particular, the analysis paid special attention to faculty preference, time on research, research collaboration, and faculty discipline. The data we used for this study is the Changing Academic Professions (CAP) data which is the follow-up study of the Carnegie Foundation in 1992. The study found that faculty preference for research affects research publishing. In addition, faculty collaboration with international peers is a critical factor in academic publishing. While time spent on research is related to publishing, time spent on teaching does not have a conflicting effect on faculty research. In the institution level analysis, institutional goal-orientation and institutional mission were found to have effects on academic publishing. However, the principal determinants of academic publishing were found to lie at the individual faculty member level. For each of these findings, there are subtle differences by academic discipline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Medical sciences (84%) have the highest rate of faculty with PhD from a Korean university followed by arts & humanities (60%), engineering (54%), natural sciences (48%), and social sciences (47%).

References

  • Abramo, G., D’Angolo, C. A., & Costa, F. D. (2008). Assessment of sectoral aggregation distortion in research productivity measurements. Research Evaluation, 17(2), 111–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baird, L. L. (1991). Publication productivity in doctoral research departments: Interdisciplinary and intradisciplinary factors. Research in Higher Education, 32, 303–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellas, M. L., & Toutkoushian, R. K. (1999). Faculty time allocation and research productivity: Gender, race, and family effects. Review of Higher Education, 22(4), 367–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieber, J. P., & Blackburn, R. T. (1993). Faculty research productivity 1972–1988: Development and application of constant units of measure. Research in Higher Education, 34(5), 551–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1986). Aging and the quality of faculty job performance. Review of Educational Research, 23(3), 265–290.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2003). Age effects in scientific productivity: The case of the Italian National Research Council (CNR). Scientometrics, 58(1), 49–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bordons, M., Zulueta, M. A., Remero, F., & Barrigon, S. (1999). Measuring interdisciplinary collaboration within a university: The effects of the multidisciplinary research programme. Scientometrics, 46(3), 383–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brew, A. (1999). Research and teaching: Changing relationships in a changing context. Studies in Higher Education, 24, 291–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Centra, J. A. (1983). Research productivity and teaching effectiveness. Research in Higher Education, 18(2), 379–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, E. A., & Sabharwal, M. (2007). Foreign-born academic scientists and engineers: Producing more and getting less than their U.S.-born peers? Research in Higher Education, 48(8), 909–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dundar, H., & Lewis, D. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 39(6), 607–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather, J. S. (2002). The mythologies of faculty productivity: Implications for institutional policy and decision making. Journal of Higher Education, 73(1), 26–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich, R. J., & Michalak, S. J., Jr. (1983). Why doesn’t research improve teaching? Some answers from a small liberal arts college. Journal of Higher Education, 54(2), 145–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gander, J. P. (1999). Faculty gender effects on academic research and teaching. Research in Higher Education, 40(2), 171–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hearn, J. C., & Anderson, M. S. (2002). Conflict in academic departments: An analysis of disputes over faculty promotion and tenure. Research in Higher Education, 43(5), 503–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horta, H. (2009). Holding a post-doctoral position before becoming a faculty member: Does it bring benefits for the scholarly enterprise? Higher Education, 58(5), 689–721.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarneving, B. (2009). Regional research and foreign collaboration. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0064-4.

  • Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, H. W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic, or independent constructs? Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muis, K. R., Bendixen, L. D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006). Domain-generality and domain-specificity in personal epistemology research: Philosophical and empirical reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 3–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, B. (1996). The teaching-research nexus: Applying a framework to university student’s learning experiences. European Journal of Education, 29, 323–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S. R., & Toutkoushian, R. K. (2006). Institutional research productivity and the connection to average student quality and overall reputation. Economics of Education Review, 25, 605–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2001). Analyzing faculty workload data using multilevel modeling. Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 171–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramsden, P., & Moses, I. (1992). Association between research and teaching in Australian higher education. Higher Education, 23, 273–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sax, L. J., Hagedorn, L. S., Arredondo, M., & Dicrisi, F. A., I. I. I. (2002). Faculty research productivity: Exploring the role of gender and family-related factors. Research in Higher Education, 43(4), 423–446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, J. C. (2009a). Building world-class research university: The Brain Korea 21 project. Higher Education, 58(5), 669–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, J. C. (2009b). Classifying higher education institutions in Korea: A performance-based approach. Higher Education, 57(2), 247–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, J., & Harman, G. (2009). New challenges for higher education: Global and Asia-Pacific perspectives. Asia Pacific Education Review, 10(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smeby, J., & Try, S. (2005). Departmental contexts and faculty research activity in Norway. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 593–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, S. (2004). Gender, children and research productivity. Research in Higher Education, 45, 891–920.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tien, F. F. (2007). Faculty research behavior and career incentives: The case of Taiwan. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 4–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, Seoul National University, Office 11-317, Sillim-dong, Kwanak-gu, Seoul, 151-742, South Korea

    Jung Cheol Shin

  2. Department of Educational Leadership, George Washington University, 2134 G Street, NW, Washington, DC, 20052, USA

    William K. Cummings

Authors
  1. Jung Cheol Shin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William K. Cummings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jung Cheol Shin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shin, J.C., Cummings, W.K. Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: research preference, collaboration, and time on research. Scientometrics 85, 581–594 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0236-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0236-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation