IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0236252.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mapping career patterns in research: A sequence analysis of career histories of ERC applicants

Author

Listed:
  • Claartje J Vinkenburg
  • Sara Connolly
  • Stefan Fuchs
  • Channah Herschberg
  • Brigitte Schels

Abstract

Despite the need to map research careers, the empirical evidence on career patterns of researchers is limited. We also do not know whether career patterns of researchers can be considered conventional in terms of steady progress or international mobility, nor do we know if career patterns differ between men and women in research as is commonly assumed. We use sequence analysis to identify career patterns of researchers across positions and institutions, based on full career histories of applicants to the European Research Council frontier research grant schemes. We distinguish five career patterns for early and established men and women researchers. With multinomial logit analyses, we estimate the relative likelihood of researchers with certain characteristics in each pattern. We find grantees among all patterns, and limited evidence of gender differences. Our findings on career patterns in research inform further studies and policy making on career development, research funding, and gender equality.

Suggested Citation

  • Claartje J Vinkenburg & Sara Connolly & Stefan Fuchs & Channah Herschberg & Brigitte Schels, 2020. "Mapping career patterns in research: A sequence analysis of career histories of ERC applicants," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0236252
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236252
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236252
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0236252&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0236252?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Azoulay, Pierre & Ganguli, Ina & Graff Zivin, Joshua, 2017. "The mobility of elite life scientists: Professional and personal determinants," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 573-590.
    2. Geuna, Aldo & Kataishi, Rodrigo & Toselli, Manuel & Guzmán, Eduardo & Lawson, Cornelia & Fernandez-Zubieta, Ana & Barros, Beatriz, 2015. "SiSOB data extraction and codification: A tool to analyze scientific careers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1645-1658.
    3. Duncan Thomas & Maria Nedeva, 2012. "Characterizing researchers to study research funding agency impacts: The case of the European Research Council's Starting Grants," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(4), pages 257-269, September.
    4. Laudel, Grit & Gläser, Jochen, 2014. "Beyond breakthrough research: Epistemic properties of research and their consequences for research funding," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1204-1216.
    5. Annamaria Conti & Fabiana Visentin, 2015. "Science and Engineering Ph.D. Students’ Career Outcomes, by Gender," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-15, August.
    6. Junming Huang & Alexander J. Gates & Roberta Sinatra & Albert-László Barabási, 2020. "Historical comparison of gender inequality in scientific careers across countries and disciplines," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(9), pages 4609-4616, March.
    7. Conti, Annamaria & Visentin, Fabiana, 2015. "A revealed preference analysis of PhD students’ choices over employment outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1931-1947.
    8. David J v H Gronbaek, 2003. "A European Research Council: An idea whose time has come?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(6), pages 391-404, December.
    9. Nedeva, Maria, 2013. "Between the global and the national: Organising European science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 220-230.
    10. Terttu Luukkonen, 2014. "The European Research Council and the European research funding landscape," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(1), pages 29-43.
    11. Terttu Luukkonen, 2012. "Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 48-60, February.
    12. Jörg Neufeld & Markus von Ins, 2011. "Informed peer review and uninformed bibliometrics?," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 31-46, March.
    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. Peng, Xianzhe & Xu, Huixin & Shi, Jin, 2024. "Are the bibliometric growth patterns of excellent scholars similar? From the analysis of ACM Fellows," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(3).

    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. Conor O’Kane & Jing A. Zhang & Jarrod Haar & James A. Cunningham, 2023. "How scientists interpret and address funding criteria: value creation and undesirable side effects," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 799-826, August.
    2. Sandström, Ulf & Van den Besselaar, Peter, 2018. "Funding, evaluation, and the performance of national research systems," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 365-384.
    3. Wuestman, Mignon & Wanzenböck, Iris & Frenken, Koen, 2023. "Local peer communities and future academic success of Ph.D. candidates," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    4. Baruffaldi, Stefano & Visentin, Fabiana & Conti, Annamaria, 2016. "The productivity of science & engineering PhD students hired from supervisors’ networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 785-796.
    5. Antonio Perianes‐Rodríguez & Carlos Olmeda-Gómez, 2021. "Effect of policies promoting open access in the scientific ecosystem: case study of ERC grantee publication practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 6825-6836, August.
    6. Abbas Abdul, 2023. "Policy seduction and governance resistance? Examining public funding agencies and academic institutions on decarbonisation research," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(1), pages 87-101.
    7. Benneworth,Paul & Olmos-Peñuela,Julia, 2014. "Resolving tensions of research utilization: The value of a usability-based approach," INGENIO (CSIC-UPV) Working Paper Series 201410, INGENIO (CSIC-UPV), revised 22 Oct 2018.
    8. Lucas Brunet & Ruth Müller, 2022. "Making the cut: How panel reviewers use evaluation devices to select applications at the European Research Council," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 486-497.
    9. Lawson, Cornelia & Geuna, Aldo & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Toselli, Manuel & Kataishi, Rodrigo, 2015. "International Careers of Researchers in Biomedical Sciences: A Comparison of the US and the UK," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201514, University of Turin.
    10. Simen G. Enger & Fulvio Castellacci, 2016. "Who gets Horizon 2020 research grants? Propensity to apply and probability to succeed in a two-step analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1611-1638, December.
    11. Jeongeun Kim & Molly Ott & Lindsey Dippold, 2020. "University and Department Influences on Scientists’ Occupational Outcomes," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 61(2), pages 197-228, March.
    12. Beatriz Barros & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Raul Fidalgo-Merino & Francisco Triguero, 2018. "Scientific knowledge percolation process and social impact: A case study on the biotechnology and microbiology perceptions on Twitter," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 804-814.
    13. Letki, Natalia & Biały, Grzegorz & Sankowski, Piotr & Walentek, Dawid, 2022. "Streamlining for excellence discriminates against women: A study of research productivity of 2.7 mln scientists in 45 countries," OSF Preprints yr8me_v1, Center for Open Science.
    14. Yu, Xiaoyao & Szymanski, Boleslaw K. & Jia, Tao, 2021. "Become a better you: Correlation between the change of research direction and the change of scientific performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(3).
    15. Matt, M. & Colinet, L. & Gaunand, A. & Joly, P.B., 2015. "A typology of impact pathways generated by a public agricultural research organization," Working Papers 2015-03, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    16. Letki, Natalia & Biały, Grzegorz & Sankowski, Piotr & Walentek, Dawid, 2022. "Streamlining for excellence discriminates against women: A study of research productivity of 2.7 mln scientists in 45 countries," OSF Preprints yr8me, Center for Open Science.
    17. Nedeva, Maria, 2013. "Between the global and the national: Organising European science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 220-230.
    18. Zhang, Ming-Ze & Wang, Tang-Rong & Lyu, Peng-Hui & Chen, Qi-Mei & Li, Ze-Xia & Ngai, Eric W.T., 2024. "Impact of gender composition of academic teams on disruptive output," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2).
    19. Julia Heuritsch, 2023. "The Evaluation Gap in Astronomy—Explained through a Rational Choice Framework," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-26, June.
    20. Timo Tohmo & Jutta Viinikainen, 2017. "Does intersectoral labour mobility pay for academics?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 83-103, October.

    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:plo:pone00:0236252. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.