Interpretations of Research Impact in Seven Disciplines

Author:

Oancea Alis1

Affiliation:

1. University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom

Abstract

Based on a 2010–11 study involving senior researchers from seven disciplines, this article explores critically some of the diverse interpretations of impact in different disciplines, sub-fields and modes of research, and researchers' views about how these interpretations articulate with top-down impact agendas and with university structures and incentive systems. Among the participants in the study, humanities researchers referred more explicitly to disciplines in framing their definitions of impact; social researchers, to theoretical and methodological traditions of research; and physical scientists, to modes of research (such as applied and theoretical). The article highlights the limits of unidirectional and short-term notions of impact and of pressures to demonstrate chain-link trajectories of influence from research insights to non-academic changes and benefits. Nonetheless, it argues that the current context offers an important (though easy-to-miss) opportunity to debate and reconceptualise ‘impact’ and its relevance to accountability processes, and to re-calibrate assessment methodologies.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Education

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3