IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/revpol/v22y2005i5p637-655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Do Career Strategies, Gender, and Work Environment Affect Faculty Productivity Levels in University‐Based Science Centers?1

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth A. Corley

Abstract

Recent studies have shown that in many science and engineering fields, almost 40% of faculty are affiliated with university‐based research centers (Corley & Gaughan, 2005). As major science funding organizations continue to increase annual levels of funding for interdisciplinary science centers, it is likely that this number will increase significantly over the next decade. Moreover, some scholars have argued that the rise of university‐based science centers has already led to the development of a new institutional form for the execution of university‐based research (Bozeman & Boardman, 2004). Yet, interestingly few researchers have studied the impacts of this new institutional form on the productivity of individual researchers. The purpose of this article is to begin to address how individual career strategies and perceptions of scientific work environments within university‐based science centers relate to the productivity of academic scientists who participate in these centers. In particular, this article investigates the relationships between productivity, individual career strategies, and perceptions of scientific work environment across gender. The results of the study demonstrate that university‐based science centers might serve as an equalizing mechanism for male and female productivity levels. Yet, women scientists affiliated with these centers are significantly more likely to feel discriminated against—and they are less likely to embrace the most promising career strategy for the current structure of these centers.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth A. Corley, 2005. "How Do Career Strategies, Gender, and Work Environment Affect Faculty Productivity Levels in University‐Based Science Centers?1," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 22(5), pages 637-655, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:revpol:v:22:y:2005:i:5:p:637-655
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00161.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00161.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1541-1338.2005.00161.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benedetto Torrisi, 2013. "Academic productivity correlated with well-being at work," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 94(2), pages 801-815, February.
    2. Sabharwal, Meghna & Hu, Qian, 2013. "Participation in university-based research centers: Is it helping or hurting researchers?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1301-1311.
    3. Tehmina Khan & Pavithra Siriwardhane, 2021. "Barriers to Career Progression in the Higher Education Sector: Perceptions of Australian Academics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-19, June.
    4. Eric E. Griffith & Nilanjana Dasgupta, 2018. "How the Demographic Composition of Academic Science and Engineering Departments Influences Workplace Culture, Faculty Experience, and Retention Risk," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-25, April.
    5. Ali Uyar & Khalil Nimer & Cemil Kuzey, 2023. "Education quality, internet access in schools, and research performance in management and accounting domains: a cross-country investigation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5441-5475, October.
    6. Benedetto Torrisi, 2014. "A multidimensional approach to academic productivity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 755-783, June.
    7. M. Teresa Antonio-García & Irene López-Navarro & Jesús Rey-Rocha, 2014. "Determinants of success for biomedical researchers: a perception-based study in a health science research environment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1747-1779, December.
    8. Mary Frank Fox & Mary Lynn Realff & Diana Roldan Rueda & Jillian Morn, 2017. "International research collaboration among women engineers: frequency and perceived barriers, by regions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1292-1306, December.
    9. Schuetzenmeister, Falk, 2010. "University Research Management: An Exploratory Literature Review," Institute of European Studies, Working Paper Series qt77p3j2hr, Institute of European Studies, UC Berkeley.
    10. Rhoten, Diana & Pfirman, Stephanie, 2007. "Women in interdisciplinary science: Exploring preferences and consequences," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 56-75, February.

    More about this item

    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:bla:revpol:v:22:y:2005:i:5:p:637-655. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ipsonea.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.