IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rfa/smcjnl/v6y2018i1p11-25.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Framing the Game: An Architectonic Analogue for Meta-Theorizing Academic Activities

Author

Listed:
  • Brian H Spitzberg

Abstract

A radical reformulation is proposed for explaining paradigm fragmentation. The broader topography of academic activities is conceptualized according to an academic game-theoretic analogue (GTA). According to this analogue, scholarly and academic activities reflect a competitive field of play and of plays. Criteria such as attention, compensation, awards, publications, tenure, and mobility become the scarce valued resources distributed in the game based on the plays that players enact. In an effort to reveal the heuristic potential of the theoretical analogy, these threads are traced across a broad array of humanistic and scientific theories and scholarship, including connections among Wittgenstein, Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend, Goffman, Foucault, Bourdieu and Lyotard.

Suggested Citation

  • Brian H Spitzberg, 2018. "Framing the Game: An Architectonic Analogue for Meta-Theorizing Academic Activities," Studies in Media and Communication, Redfame publishing, vol. 6(1), pages 11-25, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:11-25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/2943/3251
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://redfame.com/journal/index.php/smc/article/view/2943
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vincent P. Crawford, 2016. "New Directions for Modelling Strategic Behavior: Game-Theoretic Models of Communication, Coordination, and Cooperation in Economic Relationships," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 131-150, Fall.
    2. Han Woo Park & Loet Leydesdorff, 2009. "Knowledge linkage structures in communication studies using citation analysis among communication journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 81(1), pages 157-175, October.
    3. Alison Abbott & David Cyranoski & Nicola Jones & Brendan Maher & Quirin Schiermeier & Richard Van Noorden, 2010. "Metrics: Do metrics matter?," Nature, Nature, vol. 465(7300), pages 860-862, June.
    4. Kalyan Chatterjee & Robert C. Marshall, 2014. "A Game-Theoretic Model of Tenure," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Kalyan Chatterjee & William Samuelson (ed.), Game Theory and Business Applications, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 287-305, Springer.
    5. John Bishop, 2006. "Moral Intuitions versus Game Theory: A Response to Marcoux on Résumé Embellishing," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 181-189, August.
    6. Ulrik W Nash, 2014. "The Curious Anomaly of Skewed Judgment Distributions and Systematic Error in the Wisdom of Crowds," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, November.
    7. Janssen, Marco A. & Rollins, Nathan D., 2012. "Evolution of cooperation in asymmetric commons dilemmas," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 220-229.
    8. João Ricardo Faria, 2005. "The Game Academics Play: Editors versus Authors," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 1-12, January.
    9. Pierre Azoulay & Christian Fons-Rosen & Joshua S. Graff Zivin, 2019. "Does Science Advance One Funeral at a Time?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(8), pages 2889-2920, August.
    10. George A. Barnett & Catherine Huh & Youngju Kim & Han Woo Park, 2011. "Citations among communication journals and other disciplines: a network analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(2), pages 449-469, August.
    11. Julia Grant & Timothy Fogarty, 1998. "Faculty evaluation as a social dilemma: a game theoretic approach," Accounting Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(3), pages 225-248.
    12. Henry Mintzberg, 1985. "The Organization As Political Arena," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 133-154, March.
    13. Attila V. Varga, 2011. "Measuring the semantic integrity of scientific fields: a method and a study of sociology, economics and biophysics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 88(1), pages 163-177, July.
    14. João Ricardo Faria & Gonçalo Monteiro, 2008. "The Tenure Game: Building Up Academic Habits," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 370-380, September.
    15. Hanna-Mari Aula & Janne Tienari & Arild Wæraas, 2015. "The University Branding Game," International Studies of Management & Organization, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(2), pages 164-179, April.
    16. Moldoveanu, Mihnea, 2002. "Language, games and language games," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 233-251.
    17. Conor Mayo-Wilson & Kevin Zollman & David Danks, 2013. "Wisdom of crowds versus groupthink: learning in groups and in isolation," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 42(3), pages 695-723, August.
    18. João Ricardo Faria & Gonçalo Monteiro, "undated". "The Tenure Game: Building Up Academic Habits," Discussion Papers 05/32, Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Daniele Fanelli, 2009. "How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(5), pages 1-11, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. João Ricardo Faria & Rajeev K. Goel, 2016. "Academic Publication Uncertainty and Publishing Behavior: A Game-Theoretic Perspective," CESifo Working Paper Series 6176, CESifo.
    2. Besancenot, Damien & Huynh, Kim & Vranceanu, Radu, 2006. "The "Read or Write" Dilemma in Academic Production: A European Perspective," ESSEC Working Papers DR 06021, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    3. Damien Besancenot & Kim Huynh & Radu Vranceanu, 2009. "The ‘Read or Write’ Dilemma in Academic Production: A Transatlantic Perspective," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 53(1), pages 75-84, March.
    4. Bruce B. Svare, 2020. "A Cautionary Tale for Psychology and Higher Education in Asia: Following Western Practices of Incentivising Scholarship May Have Negative Outcomes," Psychology and Developing Societies, , vol. 32(1), pages 94-121, March.
    5. Chung Joo Chung & George A. Barnett & Kitae Kim & Derek Lackaff, 2013. "An analysis on communication theory and discipline," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(3), pages 985-1002, June.
    6. Keeheon Lee & Hyojung Jung & Min Song, 2016. "Subject–method topic network analysis in communication studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1761-1787, December.
    7. Gohar Feroz Khan & Sungjoon Lee & Ji Young Park & Han Woo Park, 2016. "Theories in communication science: a structural analysis using webometrics and social network approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 531-557, August.
    8. Paul Levine & Peter McAdam & Peter Welz, 2013. "On Habit and the Socially Efficient Level of Consumption and Work Effort," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0713, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
    9. Alicia Moreno-Delgado & Juan Gorraiz & Rafael Repiso, 2021. "Assessing the publication output on country level in the research field communication using Garfield’s Impact Factor," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5983-6000, July.
    10. Joao Ricardo Faria & Peter McAdam, 2014. "Does Tenure Make Researchers Less Productive? The Case of the “Specialist”," School of Economics Discussion Papers 0514, School of Economics, University of Surrey.
    11. Kaur, Jasleen & Radicchi, Filippo & Menczer, Filippo, 2013. "Universality of scholarly impact metrics," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 7(4), pages 924-932.
    12. Tamay Besiroglu & Nicholas Emery-Xu & Neil Thompson, 2022. "Economic impacts of AI-augmented R&D," Papers 2212.08198, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    13. Hussinger, Katrin & Pellens, Maikel, 2019. "Guilt by association: How scientific misconduct harms prior collaborators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 516-530.
    14. Moustafa, Khaled, 2018. "Don't fall in common science pitfall!," FrenXiv ycjha, Center for Open Science.
    15. Love, Peter E.D. & Ika, Lavagnon A. & Ahiaga-Dagbui, Dominic D., 2019. "On de-bunking ‘fake news’ in a post truth era: Why does the Planning Fallacy explanation for cost overruns fall short?," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 397-408.
    16. Jeremy Hall & Ben R. Martin, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Academic Misconduct: The Case of Business School Research," SPRU Working Paper Series 2019-02, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    17. Hyejin Park & Han Woo Park, 2018. "Two-side face of knowledge building using scientometric analysis," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(6), pages 2815-2836, November.
    18. Kartal, Melis & Tremewan, James, 2018. "An offer you can refuse: The effect of transparency with endogenous conflict of interest," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 44-55.
    19. João Faria & Rajeev Goel, 2010. "Returns to networking in academia," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 103-117, July.
    20. Robert J Warren II & Joshua R King & Charlene Tarsa & Brian Haas & Jeremy Henderson, 2017. "A systematic review of context bias in invasion biology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(8), pages 1-12, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    disciplinary evolution; game theory; meta-theory; paradigm; strategic communication;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rfa:smcjnl:v:6:y:2018:i:1:p:11-25. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Redfame publishing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.