IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rseval/v32y2023i1p116-127..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Research governance and the dynamics of science: A framework for the study of governance effects on research fields

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Nedeva
  • Mayra M Tirado
  • Duncan A Thomas

Abstract

This article offers a framework for the study of research governance effects on scientific fields framed by notions of research quality and the epistemic, organizational, and career choices they entail. The framework interprets the contested idea of ‘quality’ as an interplay involving notion origins, quality attributes, and contextual sites. We mobilize the origin and site components, to frame organizational-level events where quality notions inform selections, or selection events. Through the dynamic interplay between notions selected at specific sites, we contend, local actors enact research quality cumulatively, by making choices that privilege certain notions over others. In this article, we contribute in four ways. First, we propose an approach to study research governance effects on scientific fields. Second, we introduce first- and second-level effects of research governance paving the way to identify mechanisms through which these different levels of effects occur. Third, we assert that interactions between research spaces and fields leading to effects occur in the context of research organizations, and at nine key selection events. Fourth, and lastly, we discuss an empirical test on an illustration case to demonstrate how this approach can be applied.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Nedeva & Mayra M Tirado & Duncan A Thomas, 2023. "Research governance and the dynamics of science: A framework for the study of governance effects on research fields," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 116-127.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:1:p:116-127.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/reseval/rvac028
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:rseval:v:32:y:2023:i:1:p:116-127.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/rev .

    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.