Institutional prestige, academic supervision and research productivity of international PhD students: Evidence from Chinese returnees

Song, Wenqin; Jiang, Jin

doi:10.1177/14407833211055225

Cited by 14 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 76 publications

(172 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some recent studies on PhD student publishing documented women achieving less outputs than men (e.g. Lindahl et al, 2021), while others reported no gender differentials in publishing (Rajčan & Burns, 2021; Shen & Jiang, 2021).…”

Section: Gender and Publishingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Publishing during a sociology PhD in Australia: Differences by elite and non-elite universities and gender

Rajčan,

Burns

2024

Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the latest decade of Australian sociology PhD completions for differences in the number and quality of research outputs students published during doctoral enrolment. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between Go8 PhD students and their non-Go8 PhD counterparts in terms of either the quantity of research publications achieved, or the quality of these publications as measured by high-impact journals. There was also insufficient evidence statistically to conclude that Go8 men and Go8 women differed from one another, or that non-Go8 men and non-Go8 women differed from one another in overall quantity of outputs and publishing in high-impact journals. However, publishing success of men and women, when combined, regardless of whether they were at elite Go8 or non-Go8 institutions, showed gender had a marginally significant effect on publication productivity, men outperforming women, in both publication counts and in publishing in high-impact journals.

show abstract

Section: Gender and Publishingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Publishing during a sociology PhD in Australia: Differences by elite and non-elite universities and gender

Rajčan,

Burns

2024

Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recognise and value the diverse skillset of research management and technical staff (and early career researchers), and provide opportunities for them to host and supervise researchers, apply for research grants and undertake research (41,45,59,95,158,227,231,239,246)…”

Section: Everyone Feeling Valued and Having Equality Of Opportunities...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consider 'human-oriented' knowledge practices over 'outputoriented' practices so that researchers and educators are evaluated based on value, quality and contribution, including early career researchers (4,45,145,177,193,221,231,241,247) Ensure routes for development are 1 Develop and reward cross-disciplinary training and mentoring aligned with development of on the job skills to promote interdisciplinary inclusive and for everyone (regardless of position, role or discipline)…”

Section: Measuring Success That Rewards Contribution and Open Researc...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Maintain hiring, appointment and promotional policies are fair and not solely based on authorship, publications or secured grants, and value softer skills (24,55,85,135,136,169,216,231,237,247,256,257,263,264,275,279,(297)(298)(299)(300)(301)(302)(303)(304)(305)(306) Develop a coordinated approach to incentivize open access policies to optimise a positive cultural shift based on Government recognition of UK Research and Innovation's position on open access research practice, (including European and international position and status of progression/advancement in open research) (8,27,85,98,126,135,162,218,250,268,271,272,274,275,288,301,306,307) 6…”

Section: Research Quality and Accountability -Open And Trustworthy Re...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ‘What does the evidence say about the ‘problem’ with ‘poor’ research culture, what are the benefits of ‘good’ research culture, and what does ‘good’ look like?’ Aims: To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution.Methods: A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results: 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions: There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals’ well-being, career progression and performance.

show abstract

“…Many studies on factors affecting researcher development have focused on graduate education. Past studies have revealed that supervising professor's support positively affects the publication performance of students during doctoral training and up to 1.5 years post-degree (Shibayama and Kobayashi, 2017 ; Shen and Jiang, 2021 ). On the other hand, there is little research on the factors that determine research performance from degree completion to becoming a mid-career professional researcher, and not fully understood except the importance of the current work environment (Way et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of supervisors' research style on young biomedical scientists' capacity development as measured by REDi, a novel index of crossdisciplinarity

Hashiguchi

Hamada²,

Takahashi³

et al. 2022

Front. Res. Metr. Anal.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The challenge for medical schools in Japan is to develop research activities for innovation. This study aimed at analyzing the connection between the research output of “promising researchers” (next-generation leaders in terms of research activity) and their supervisors' past research activities to identify those factors that impact researchers' performance. Activity was analyzed from the viewpoints of productivity, coauthorship networks, and research impact using a novel index called the Research Diversity Index (REDi) that quantifies crossdisciplinarity. Research funding, which has not yet been fully utilized in correlation studies of the characteristics of authors, was also considered in this study. For the promising researchers extracted using betweenness centrality scores within coauthorship networks, there were diachronic correlations between the records of the promising researchers and those of their supervisors. Supervisor leadership as measured by the number of last-authored publications and extent of networking had a positive effect on the promising researchers productivity. Supervisors' research style of integrating knowledge from multiple fields, as measured by REDi, was negatively correlated with the publication impact of promising researchers, suggesting that REDi is useful as a novel indicator of research quality not being captured by existing indices. It was also noted that establishing an academic presence through extensive collaborations could be advantageous for obtaining research funding, especially from top-down government programs. The possible implications of this study for promoting research activities are the importance of incorporating new doctorates into research groups at an early stage and that of promoting interinstitutional, crossdisciplinary collaborations.Classification codeMSC: 62P10 Applications of statistics to biology and medical sciences; meta-analysis.JEL: Z1Z10 Cultural Economics • Economic Sociology • Economic Anthropology- General.

show abstract

Institutional prestige, academic supervision and research productivity of international PhD students: Evidence from Chinese returnees

Cited by 14 publications

References 76 publications

Publishing during a sociology PhD in Australia: Differences by elite and non-elite universities and gender

Publishing during a sociology PhD in Australia: Differences by elite and non-elite universities and gender

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Impact of supervisors' research style on young biomedical scientists' capacity development as measured by REDi, a novel index of crossdisciplinarity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About