Factors Influencing Publication Impact of Faculty
Author: Ling-Ling Kueh (College of Social Science, Assessment Research Center, National Sun Yet-sen University), Ching-Fan Sheu (Institution of Education, National Cheng Kung University; Graduate Institute of Human Resource Management, National Changhua University of Education)
Vol.&No.:Vol. 69, No. 4
Date:December 2024
Pages:229-261
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202412_69(4).0008
Abstract:
Introduction
Academic paper publication and citation count are primary indicators used to assess the research impact of university faculty, serving as benchmarks for educational policy formulation, major university decisions, and resource allocation. Bibliometrics or citation metrics are predominantly used in research on publication impact. Citation-based metrics provide several advantages, particularly with respect to reducing the subjective bias of peer review processes (Sternberg, 2018). These metrics are quantifiable measures that enable a comparative evaluation of scholars’ impact and standing within their respective academic fields (Ruscio et al., 2012). Therefore, metrics such as the h-index (Hirsch, 2005) have gained considerable research attention and serve as essential reference points in assessments of faculty scholarly output in major research databases such as the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
Literature Review
Various societal, organizational, and institutional factors contribute to the academic productivity and publication impact of university faculty members (Aboagy et al., 2021; Fisher, 2005; Golden & Carstensen, 1992). Despite their professional and research interests, faculty members’ academic research output and impact patterns are often shaped by the opportunities created and the requirements imposed by their affiliated institutions (Way et al., 2019). Consequently, a close connection exists between faculty publication impact and the research environment.
A higher graduate student-faculty ratio suggests that faculty members must dedicate more time to teaching activities and student supervision, which may reduce their research productivity (O’Hara et al., 2019; Smeltzer et al., 2016). However, graduate students also serve as valuable human resources for faculty research (Buckner & Zhang, 2021). Therefore, the present study further explored the uncertain relationship between the student-faculty ratio of a department and its faculty publication impact, accounting for the college affiliation of faculty members.
Studies have indicated that early involvement in academic work yields benefits in terms of accumulating research output and impact (Mishra & Smyth, 2013; Nosek et al., 2010; Sugimoto et al., 2016). However, Sinatra et al. (2016) discovered that scientific researchers randomly produce highly impactful works instead of following a systematic trajectory from their first publication. Full professors are often in advantageous positions in terms of having research resources and professional networks, which may aid them in accumulating research publications and impact (Colaco et al., 2013). Conversely, assistant or associate professors may be required to dedicate more time and effort to publishing research papers because of the pressures associated with earning promotions and tenure (Hesli et al., 2012). Furthermore, faculty members who earned their doctoral degrees abroad may have more opportunities for academic networking and international collaborations relative to those with domestic doctoral degrees (Huang et al., 2022), potentially leading to higher citation rates and greater visibility for their research works (Bauder, 2020). Faculty members often co-author research papers with their graduate students (Henriksen, 2016). When professors supervise graduate student thesis projects, their active involvement may result in them having co-authorship for the resulting publications, which indicates a potential connection between the publication outcomes of professors and the thesis projects they supervise (Corsini et al., 2022). Gender has also garnered considerable attention in this context because of its effect on faculty members’ publication impact (Abramo et al., 2019; Aguinis et al., 2018; Eloy et al., 2013; Jena et al., 2016). In academia, men often secure key positions, resources, and international collaboration opportunities more frequently than women do (Kwiek & Roszka, 2021), contributing to gender bias in academic research, with the problems and effects related to female representation often overlooked (Abramo et al., 2019). Such underrepresentation may adversely affect female scholars (van Veelenn & Derks, 2022).
The present study investigated the influence of several factors on faculty publication at various levels, including college affiliation, the student–faculty ratio, academic seniority, graduate student supervision, academic rank, domestic (or foreign) doctoral degree, and gender. Additionally, given the hierarchical structure of educational data, this study employed generalized linear mixed-effect model tree analysis to examine data with nested and clustered properties.
Method
The present study enrolled faculty members from a research-intensive comprehensive university in southern Taiwan, establishing a sample of 800 university faculty members selected from 50 departments across 9 colleges (Bioscience and Biotechnology, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Engineering, Liberal Arts, Management, Medicine, Planning and Design, Sciences, and Social Sciences). Data were collected manually from the university websites and the National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan, with information such as the origin of degrees, academic rank, year of first publication, gender, and the number of supervised graduate students extracted.
Results
College affiliation was identified as the most significant factor in determining the academic research impact of faculty members. Faculty members were classified into two major domains: natural sciences and humanities and social sciences. In the humanities and social sciences domain, the College of Liberal Arts and the College of Planning and Design exhibited similarities, as did the College of Management and the College of Social Sciences. Academic rank was the second most significant factor influencing these two clusters, with significant differences in the h-index being identified between professors and associate professors/assistant professors. In the natural sciences domain, the student-faculty ratio of a department was the second most significant factor after college affiliation. Faculty members were further categorized by the student-faculty ratios of their affiliated departments and their college affiliation. Within clusters such as the College of Medicine and the College of Science, academic rank was positively and significantly correlated with h-index performance. Conversely, in clusters such as the College of Engineering, the College of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and the College of Life Sciences, h-index performance was additionally influenced by whether a faculty member had a domestic or foreign doctoral degree.
Discussion
The publication impact of faculty members in the natural sciences domain was significantly higher than that of faculty members in the humanities and social sciences domain. This finding can be attributed to differences in collaborative research and funding. The student-faculty ratio substantially influenced the publication impact of natural sciences faculty, likely because of the prevalence of co-authorship in this domain. Academic seniority and graduate student supervision had varying effects across the clusters. Although full professors generally achieved a higher publication impact, assistant professors from specific departments also achieved excellent performance. Faculty members with foreign doctoral degrees had a higher publication impact, with this being particularly true for those in departments with higher student-faculty ratios. No significant gender-related differences were identified within the study sample.
Conclusion
Full professors from the College of Medicine and the College of Science, which are within the natural sciences domain, achieved the highest publication impact. By contrast, associate professors and assistant professors in the College of Planning and Design and the College of Liberal Arts, which are within the humanities and social sciences domain, are likely to encounter difficulties in building publication impact, according to citation metrics. Therefore, government agencies and universities should avoid directly comparing disparate fields when allocating resources. Additionally, researchers and relevant authorities must account for the potential varying effects of factors such as PhD origin and the number of supervised students across specific domains. Institutions can effectively optimize resource allocation to enhance academic productivity by adopting a nuanced approach to such allocation.
Keywords:
faculty, research publication impact, generalized linear-mixed model tree
《Full Text》
References:
- 胡詠翔、俞慧芸(2020)。以教育大數據分析驅動入學管理機制開設新生銜接課程提升就學穩定度之研究。教育科學研究期刊,65(4),31-63。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES. 202012_65(4).0002【Hu, Y.-H., & Yu, H.-Y. (2020). Improving retention rate through educational data mining: The design of placement program for newly enrolled students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 65(4), 31-63. https://doi.org/ 10.6209/JORIES.202012_65(4).0002】
- 郭玲玲、許清芳(2022)。引文?引文—大學學術發表影響力之初探:以成功大學為例。教育研究與發展期刊,18(4),1-40。https://doi.org/10.6925/SCJ.202212_18(4).0001【Kueh, L.-L., & Sheu, C.-F. (2022). Citation, citation, citation: A first look at the publication effect of National Cheng Kung University faculty. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 18(4), 1-40. https:// doi.org/10.6925/SCJ.202212_18(4).0001】
- 黃家凱、林侑毅、陳慶智(2022)。國際高等教育競爭力分析:以新加坡與韓國大學教師待遇與兼職制度為例。教育科學研究期刊,67(2),33-61。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES. 202206_67(2).0002【Huang, C.-K., Lin, Y.-Y., & Chen, Q.-Z. (2022). An analysis of the faculty’s compensation package and part-time employment policies: The global competitive advantage of higher education in Singaporean and South Korean universities. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 67(2), 33-61. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES. 202206_67(2).0002】
- 黃嘉莉、葉怡芬、許瑛玿、曾元顯(2017)。取得中學教職的關鍵因素:運用決策樹探勘師資培育歷程。教育科學研究期刊,62(2),89-123。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).04【Huang, J.-L., Yeh, Y.-F., Hsu, Y.-S., & Tseng, Y.-H. (2017). Critical factors of becoming secondary school teachers: Mining the process of teacher education by decision trees. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 62(2), 89-123. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).04】
- 教育部(2020)。專科以上學校總量發展規模與資源條件標準。https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/ LawContent.aspx?id=FL049460【Ministry of Education. (2020). Standards for student admission quotas and resources at institutions of higher education. https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=FL049460】
» More
- 一、中文文獻
- 胡詠翔、俞慧芸(2020)。以教育大數據分析驅動入學管理機制開設新生銜接課程提升就學穩定度之研究。教育科學研究期刊,65(4),31-63。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES. 202012_65(4).0002【Hu, Y.-H., & Yu, H.-Y. (2020). Improving retention rate through educational data mining: The design of placement program for newly enrolled students. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 65(4), 31-63. https://doi.org/ 10.6209/JORIES.202012_65(4).0002】
- 郭玲玲、許清芳(2022)。引文?引文—大學學術發表影響力之初探:以成功大學為例。教育研究與發展期刊,18(4),1-40。https://doi.org/10.6925/SCJ.202212_18(4).0001【Kueh, L.-L., & Sheu, C.-F. (2022). Citation, citation, citation: A first look at the publication effect of National Cheng Kung University faculty. Journal of Educational Research and Development, 18(4), 1-40. https:// doi.org/10.6925/SCJ.202212_18(4).0001】
- 黃家凱、林侑毅、陳慶智(2022)。國際高等教育競爭力分析:以新加坡與韓國大學教師待遇與兼職制度為例。教育科學研究期刊,67(2),33-61。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES. 202206_67(2).0002【Huang, C.-K., Lin, Y.-Y., & Chen, Q.-Z. (2022). An analysis of the faculty’s compensation package and part-time employment policies: The global competitive advantage of higher education in Singaporean and South Korean universities. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 67(2), 33-61. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES. 202206_67(2).0002】
- 黃嘉莉、葉怡芬、許瑛玿、曾元顯(2017)。取得中學教職的關鍵因素:運用決策樹探勘師資培育歷程。教育科學研究期刊,62(2),89-123。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).04【Huang, J.-L., Yeh, Y.-F., Hsu, Y.-S., & Tseng, Y.-H. (2017). Critical factors of becoming secondary school teachers: Mining the process of teacher education by decision trees. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 62(2), 89-123. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).04】
- 教育部(2020)。專科以上學校總量發展規模與資源條件標準。https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/ LawContent.aspx?id=FL049460【Ministry of Education. (2020). Standards for student admission quotas and resources at institutions of higher education. https://edu.law.moe.gov.tw/LawContent.aspx?id=FL049460】
- 蔡明學、黃建翔(2019)。應用資料探勘技術探究我國高中生適性學習影響因素。當代教育研究季刊,27(2),39-76。https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.201906_27(2).0002【Tsai, M.-H., & Huang, C.-H. (2019). Application of data mining theory to investigate factors impacting high school students’ adaptive learning in Taiwan. Contemporary Educational Research Quarterly, 27(2), 39-76. https://doi.org/10.6151/CERQ.201906_27(2).0002】
- 鄭中平、許清芳(2024)。R在行為科學之應用(第二版)。雙葉書廊。【Cheng, C.-P., & Sheu, C.-F. (2024). R for behavioral science (2nd ed.) Yeh Yeh Book Gallery.】
- 鄭永福、許瑛玿(2017)。應用決策樹探索大學以上畢業生薪資之影響因素。教育科學研究期刊,62(2),125-151。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).05【Cheng, Y.-F., & Hsu, Y.-S. (2017). Decision Tree for investigating the factors affecting graduate salaries. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 62(2), 125-151. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.2017.62(2).05】
二、外文文獻
- Aboagye, E., Jensen, I., Bergström, G., Brämberg, E. B., Pico-Espinosa, O. J., & Björklund, C. (2021). Investigating the association between publication performance and the work environment of university research academics: A systematic review. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3283-3301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03820-y
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Caprasecca, A. (2009). The contribution of star scientists to overall sex differences in research productivity. Scientometrics, 81(1), 137-156. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/ s11192-008-2131-7
- Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C. A., & Di Costa, F. (2019). A gender analysis of top scientists’ collaboration behavior: Evidence from Italy. Scientometrics, 120, 405-418. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11192-019-03136-6
- Aguinis, H., Ji, Y. H., & Joo, H. (2018). Gender productivity gap among star performers in STEM and other scientific fields. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(12), 1283-1306. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/apl0000331
- Akbaritabar, A., Casnici, N., & Squazzoni, F. (2018). The conundrum of research productivity: A study on sociologists in Italy. Scientometrics, 114(3), 859-882. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11192-017-2606-5
- Barnes, C. (2017). The h-index debate: An introduction for librarians. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 43(6), 487-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2017.08.013
- Bauder, H. (2020). International mobility and social capital in the academic field. Minerva, 58(3), 367-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-020-09401-w
- Baumer, B. (2015). A data science course for undergraduates: Thinking with data. The American Statistician, 69(4), 334-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.2015.1081105
- Bedeian, A. G., Cavazos, D. E., Hunt, J. G., & Jauch, L. R. (2010). Doctoral degree prestige and the academic marketplace: A study of career mobility within the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(1), 11-25. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.9.1.zqr11
- Belavy, D. L., Owen, P. J., & Livingston, P. M. (2020). Do successful PhD outcomes reflect the research environment rather than academic ability? PlOS ONE, 15(8), e0236327. https://doi.org/ 10.1371/journal.pone.0236327
- Biglan, A. (1973a). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57 (3), 195-203. https://doi.org/10.1037/H0034701
- Biglan, A. (1973b). Relationships between subject matter characteristics and the structure and output of university departments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 204-213. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/H0034699
- Bland, C. J., Center, B. A., Finstad, D. A., Risbey, K. R., & Staples, J. G. (2005). A theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research productivity. Academic Medicine, 80(3), 225-237. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200503000-00006
- Bonaccorsi, A., Belingheri, P., & Secondi, L. (2021). The research productivity of universities. A multilevel and multidisciplinary analysis on European institutions. Journal of Informetrics, 15(2), 101129. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2020.101129
- Bonaccorsi, A., & Secondi, L. (2017). The determinants of research performance in European universities: A large-scale multilevel analysis. Scientometrics, 112(3), 1147-1178. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2442-7
- Bornmann, L. (2017). Measuring impact in research evaluations: Athorough discussion of methods for, effects of and problems with impact measurements. Higher Education, 73, 775-787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-9995-x
- Breiman, L., & Ihaka, R. (1984). Nonlinear discriminant analysis via scaling and ACE. Department of Statistics, University of California.
- Buckner, E., & Zhang, Y. (2021). The quantity-quality tradeoff: A cross-national, longitudinal analysis of national student-faculty ratios in higher education. Higher Education, 82, 39-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00621-3
- Cargill, M., O’Connor, P., & Li, Y. (2012). Educating Chinese scientists to write for international journals: Addressing the divide between science and technology education and English language teaching. English for Specific Purposes, 31(1), 60-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/ J.ESP.2011.05.003
- Colaco, M., Svider, P. F., Mauro, K. M., Eloy, J. A., & Jackson-Rosario, I. (2013). Is there a relationship between National Institutes of Health funding and research impact on academic urology? The Journal of Urology, 190(3), 999-1003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro. 2013.02.3186
- Corsini, A., Pezzoni, M., & Visentin, F. (2022). What makes a productive Ph. D. student? Research Policy, 51(10), 104561. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104561
- Darmadji, A., Prasojo, L. D., Kusumaningrum, F. A., & Andriansyah, Y. (2018). Research productivity and international collaboration of top Indonesian universities. Current Science, 115(4), 653-658. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v115/i4/653-658
- Dundar, H., & Lewis, D. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 39(6), 607-631. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018705823763
- Eloy, J. A., Svider, P. F., Cherla, D. V., Diaz, L., Kovalerchik, O., Mauro, K. M., Baredes, S., & Chandrasekhar, S. S. (2013). Gender disparities in research productivity among 9952 academic physicians. The Laryngoscope, 123(8), 1865-1875. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.24039
- Fisher, R. L. (2005). The research productivity of scientists: How gender, organization culture, and the problem choice process influence the productivity of scientists. University Press of America.
- Fokkema, M., Edbrooke-Childs, J., & Wolpert, M. (2021). Generalized linear mixed-model (GLMM) trees: A flexible decision-tree method for multilevel and longitudinal data. Psychotherapy Research, 31(3), 329-341. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2020.1785037
- Fokkema, M., Smits, N., Zeileis, A., Hothorn, T., & Kelderman, H. (2018). Detecting treatment-subgroup interactions in clustered data with generalized linear mixed-effects model trees. Behavior Research Methods, 50(5), 2016-2034. https://doi.org/10.3758/ s13428-017-0971-x
- Fox, M. F. (1983). Publication productivity among scientists: A critical review. Social Studies of Science, 13(2), 285-305. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631283013002005
- Fox, M. F., & Nikivincze, I. (2021). Being highly prolific in academic science: Characteristics of individuals and their departments. Higher Education, 81(6), 1237-1255. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10734-020-00609-z
- Golden, J., & Carstensen, F. V. (1992). Academic research productivity, department size and organization: Further results, comment. Economics of Education Review, 11(2), 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-7757(92)90005-N
- González-Sauri, M., & Rossello, G. (2022). The role of early-career university prestige stratification on the future academic performance of scholars. Research in Higher Education, 64, 58-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-022-09679-7
- Hellqvist, B. (2010). Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2), 310-318. https:// doi.org/10.1002/asi.21256
- Henriksen, D. (2016). The rise in co-authorship in the social sciences (1980-2013). Scientometrics, 107(2), 455-476. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1849-x
- Hesli, V. L., Lee, J. M., & Mitchell, S. M. (2012). Predicting rank attainment in political science: What else besides publications affects promotion? PS: Political Science & Politics, 45(3), 475-492. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096512000364
- Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(46), 16569-16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/ pnas.0507655102
- Jena, A. B., Olenski, A. R., & Blumenthal, D. M. (2016). Sex differences in physician salary in US public medical schools. JAMA Internal Medicine, 176(9), 1294-1304. https://doi.org/ 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.3284
- Knight, E., & Mitchell, V. (2023). The “how” rather than the “what” of research impact. Higher Education Research & Development, 42(2), 336-349. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 07294360.2022.2057452
- Kwiek, M. (2018). High research productivity in vertically undifferentiated higher education systems: Who are the top performers? Scientometrics, 115(1), 415-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11192-018-2644-7
- Kwiek, M., & Roszka, W. (2021). Gender disparities in international research collaboration: A study of 25,000 university professors. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(5), 1344-1380. https:// doi.org/10.1111/joes.12395
- Kwiek, M., & Roszka, W. (2023). Once highly productive, forever highly productive? Full professors’ research productivity from a longitudinal perspective. Higher Education, 87, 519-549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01022-y
- Kyvik, S., & Smeby, J.-C. (1994). Teaching and research. The relationship between the supervision of graduate students and faculty research performance. Higher Education, 28(2), 227-239. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01383730
- Li, S., Shen, H., Bao, P., & Cheng, X. (2021). hu -index: Aunified index to quantify individuals across disciplines. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3209-3226. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11192-021-03879-1
- Maflahi, N., & Thelwall, M. (2021). Domestic researchers with longer careers generate higher average citation impact but it does not increase over time. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(2), 560-587. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00132
- Mishra, V., & Smyth, R. (2013). Are more senior academics really more research productive than junior academics? Evidence from Australian law schools. Scientometrics, 96(2), 411-425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0886-3
- Nosek, B. A., Graham, J., Lindner, N. M., Kesebir, S., Hawkins, C. B., Hahn, C., Schmidt, K., Motyl, M., Joy-Gaba, J., Frazier, R., & Tenney, E. R. (2010). Cumulative and career-stage citation impact of social-personality psychology programs and their members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36(10), 1283-1300. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210378111
- O’Hara, L., Lower-Hoppe, L., & Mulvihill, T. (2019). Mentoring graduate students in the publishing process: Making it manageable and meaningful for academics. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 31(2), 323-331. https:// eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1224348
- Ochsner, M., Hug, S., & Galleron, I. (2017). The future of research assessment in the humanities: Bottom-up assessment procedures. Palgrave Communications, 3(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/ 10.1057/palcomms.2017.20
- Parish, A. J., Boyack, K. W., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2018). Dynamics of co-authorship and productivity across different fields of scientific research. PloS One, 13(1), e0189742. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0189742
- Patience, G. S., Patience, C. A., Blais, B., & Bertrand, F. (2017). Citation analysis of scientific categories. Heliyon, 3(5), e00300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2017.e00300
- Perkmann, M., Salandra, R., Tartari, V., McKelvey, M., & Hughes, A. (2021). Academic engagement: A review of the literature 2011-2019. Research Policy, 50(1), 104114. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.respol.2020.104114
- Rad, A. E., Brinjikji, W., Cloft, H. J., & Kallmes, D. F. (2010). The H-index in academic radiology. Academic Radiology, 17(7), 817-821. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2010.03.011
- Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Sage.
- R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. A Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
- Reed, M. S., Ferré, M., Martin-Ortega, J., Blanche, R., Lawford-Rolfe, R., Dallimer, M., & Holden, J. (2021). Evaluating impact from research: A methodological framework. Research Policy, 50(4), 104147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104147
- Reymert, I., & Thune, T. (2023). Task complementarity in academic work: A study of the relationship between research, education and third mission tasks among university professors. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 48(1), 331-360. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10961-021-09916-8
- Ruscio, J., & Roche, B. (2012). Determining the number of factors to retain in an exploratory factor analysis using comparison data of known factorial structure. Psychological Assessment, 24(2), 282-292. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025697
- Ryazanova, O., & Jaskiene, J. (2022). Managing individual research productivity in academic organizations: A review of the evidence and a path forward. Research Policy, 51(2), 104448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104448
- Shin, J. C., & Cummings, W. (2010). Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: Research preference, collaboration, and time on research. Scientometrics, 85(2), 581-594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0236-2
- Sinatra, R., Wang, D., Deville, P., Song, C., & Barabási, A.-L. (2016). Quantifying the evolution of individual scientific impact. Science, 354(6312), 596-604. https://doi.org/10.1126/science. aaf5239
- Smeltzer, S. C., Cantrell, M. A., Sharts-Hopko, N. C., Heverly, M. A., Jenkinson, A., & Nthenge, S. (2016). Assessment of the impact of teaching demands on research productivity among doctoral nursing program faculty. Journal of Professional Nursing, 32(3), 180-192. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.profnurs.2015.06.011
- Sternberg, R. J. (2018). Evaluating merit among scientists. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 7(2), 209-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JARMAC.2018.03.003
- Sugimoto, C. R., Sugimoto, T. J., Tsou, A., Milojević, S., & Larivière, V. (2016). Age stratification and cohort effects in scholarly communication: A study of social sciences. Scientometrics, 109(2), 997-1016. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-2087-y
- Thelwall, M., & Fairclough, R. (2020). All downhill from the PhD? The typical impact trajectory of U.S. academic careers. Quantitative Science Studies, 1(3), 1334-1348. https://doi.org/10.1162/ qss_a_00072
- Van Veelen, R., & Derks, B. (2022). Equal representation does not mean equal opportunity: Women academics perceive a thicker glass ceiling in social and behavioral fields than in the natural sciences and economics. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 790211. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg. 2022.790211
- Verbree, M., Horlings, E., Groenewegen, P., Van der Weijden, I., & van den Besselaar, P. (2015). Organizational factors influencing scholarly performance: A multivariate study of biomedical research groups. Scientometrics, 102(1), 25-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1437-x
- Vinkler, P. (2023). Impact of the number and rank of coauthors on h-index and π-index. The part-impact method. Scientometrics, 128(4), 2349-2369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192- 023-04643-3
- Wang, W., Liao, M., & Stapleton, L. (2019). Incidental second-level dependence in educational survey data with a nested data structure. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 571-596. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09480-6
- Way, S. F., Morgan, A. C., Larremore, D. B., & Clauset, A. (2019). Productivity, prominence, and the effects of academic environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(22), 10729-10733. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1817431116
- Williams, K. (2020). Playing the fields: Theorizing research impact and its assessment. Research Evaluation, 29(2), 191-202. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa001
- Zeileis, A., Hothorn, T., & Hornik, K. (2008). Model-based recursive partitioning. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 17(2), 492-514. https://doi.org/10.1198/ 106186008X319331