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