IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v6y2020i1d10.1057_s41599-020-0427-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Valuation discourses and disciplinary positioning struggles of academic researchers—A case study of ‘maverick’ academics

Author

Listed:
  • Sixian Hah

    (University of Warwick
    National University of Singapore)

Abstract

While it is known that researchers need to contend with increasing demands in the evolving landscape of higher education in the UK, few studies have examined how academic researchers discursively construct their struggles. This paper explores the valuation discourses that academic researchers draw upon to construct and account for their struggles in the process of establishing themselves as academics. It strives to answer the question: What kinds of struggles do academics face when positioning themselves and their research in relation to disciplines? What kinds of valuation discourses do academic researchers draw upon to position themselves as academics working in certain disciplines? The data comes from my PhD research, where I conducted 30 qualitative interviews with academic researchers ranging from PhD students, early career researchers to Professors Emeriti, who work in applied linguistics and language-related fields in UK universities. This paper focuses on two case studies of academics who positioned themselves as “mavericks” or who resist being pigeonholed in one discipline. In order to provide some comparative basis, the two case studies come from two ends of the academic career spectrum. I examine how they constructed their struggles with positioning themselves in relation to disciplines, and the kinds of valuation discourses evoked in the process. The paper proposes a model that conceptualizes how disciplinary positioning struggles are constructed by discursive acts and in the process, produce and reinforce valuation discourses about academic disciplines. Embedded in these disciplinary positioning struggles, researchers employed academic categories (Angermuller, 2017. High Educ 73(6):963–980) and evoked valuation discourses. The paper illustrates how academics hold valuation discourses about the kinds of disciplinary positioning practices that are valued, which may sometimes differ from the valuation discourses of fellow researchers, institutions and other stakeholders in higher education. The paper argues that such incongruence in valuation discourses between the individual and others result in positioning struggles.

Suggested Citation

  • Sixian Hah, 2020. "Valuation discourses and disciplinary positioning struggles of academic researchers—A case study of ‘maverick’ academics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:6:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-0427-2
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-020-0427-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-020-0427-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-020-0427-2?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
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rick Rylance, 2015. "Grant giving: Global funders to focus on interdisciplinarity," Nature, Nature, vol. 525(7569), pages 313-315, September.
    2. Huutoniemi, Katri & Klein, Julie Thompson & Bruun, Henrik & Hukkinen, Janne, 2010. "Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 79-88, February.
    3. Richard Van Noorden, 2015. "Interdisciplinary research by the numbers," Nature, Nature, vol. 525(7569), pages 306-307, September.
    4. Rebekah R. Brown & Ana Deletic & Tony H. F. Wong, 2015. "Interdisciplinarity: How to catalyse collaboration," Nature, Nature, vol. 525(7569), pages 315-317, September.
    5. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marta Natalia Wróblewska, 2021. "Research impact evaluation and academic discourse," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.

    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. Roland Barthel & Roman Seidl, 2017. "Interdisciplinary Collaboration between Natural and Social Sciences – Status and Trends Exemplified in Groundwater Research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27, January.
    2. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Jin Wang, 2022. "A study of interdisciplinary accounting research: analysing the diversity of cited references," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(2), pages 2131-2162, June.
    3. Kevin M. Kniffin & Andrew S. Hanks, 2017. "Antecedents and near-term consequences for interdisciplinary dissertators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1225-1250, June.
    4. Max Oke Kluger & Gerhard Bartzke, 2020. "A practical guideline how to tackle interdisciplinarity—A synthesis from a post-graduate group project," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Ran Xu & Navid Ghaffarzadegan, 2018. "Neuroscience bridging scientific disciplines in health: Who builds the bridge, who pays for it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(2), pages 1183-1204, November.
    6. Lina Xu & Steven Dellaportas & Zhiqiang Yang & Jin Wang, 2023. "More on the relationship between interdisciplinary accounting research and citation impact," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 63(4), pages 4779-4803, December.
    7. Froese, Anna & Woiwode, Hendrik & Suckow, Silvio, 2019. "Mission Impossible? Neue Wege zu Interdisziplinarität: Empfehlungen für Wissenschaft, Wissenschaftspolitik und Praxis," Discussion Papers, Research Group Science Policy Studies SP III 2019-601, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. Laurens K. Hessels & Stefan P.L. De Jong & Stijn Brouwer, 2018. "Collaboration between Heterogeneous Practitioners in Sustainability Research: A Comparative Analysis of Three Transdisciplinary Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    9. Alfonso Ávila-Robinson & Cristian Mejia & Shintaro Sengoku, 2021. "Are bibliometric measures consistent with scientists’ perceptions? The case of interdisciplinarity in research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(9), pages 7477-7502, September.
    10. Chen, Shiji & Qiu, Junping & Arsenault, Clément & Larivière, Vincent, 2021. "Exploring the interdisciplinarity patterns of highly cited papers," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1).
    11. Zhang, Yang & Wang, Yang & Du, Haifeng & Havlin, Shlomo, 2024. "Delayed citation impact of interdisciplinary research," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1).
    12. Ben Purvis & Hannah Keding & Ashley Lewis & Phil Northall, 2023. "Critical reflections of postgraduate researchers on a collaborative interdisciplinary research project," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Francesco Giovanni Avallone & Alberto Quagli & Paola Ramassa, 2022. "Interdisciplinary research by accounting scholars: An exploratory study," FINANCIAL REPORTING, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2022(2), pages 5-34.
    14. Keisuke Okamura, 2019. "Interdisciplinarity revisited: evidence for research impact and dynamism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, December.
    15. Marco Seeber & Jef Vlegels & Mattia Cattaneo, 2022. "Conditions that do or do not disadvantage interdisciplinary research proposals in project evaluation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(8), pages 1106-1126, August.
    16. Cottafava, Dario & Ascione, Grazia Sveva & Corazza, Laura & Dhir, Amandeep, 2022. "Sustainable development goals research in higher education institutions: An interdisciplinarity assessment through an entropy-based indicator," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 138-155.
    17. Meijun Liu & Dongbo Shi & Jiang Li, 2017. "Double-edged sword of interdisciplinary knowledge flow from hard sciences to humanities and social sciences: Evidence from China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(9), pages 1-16, September.
    18. Luka Ursić & Godfrey Baldacchino & Željana Bašić & Ana Belén Sainz & Ivan Buljan & Miriam Hampel & Ivana Kružić & Mia Majić & Ana Marušić & Franck Thetiot & Ružica Tokalić & Leandra Vranješ Markić, 2022. "Factors Influencing Interdisciplinary Research and Industry-Academia Collaborations at Six European Universities: A Qualitative Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-24, July.
    19. Kwon, Seokbeom, 2022. "Interdisciplinary knowledge integration as a unique knowledge source for technology development and the role of funding allocation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    20. Fontana, Magda & Iori, Martina & Montobbio, Fabio & Sinatra, Roberta, 2020. "New and atypical combinations: An assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).

    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:pal:palcom:v:6:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-0427-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.