IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/266360.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hypotheses on Institutional Autonomy Decline

Author

Listed:
  • Roberts Lyer, Kirsten
  • Saliba, Ilyas
  • Spannagel, Janika

Abstract

This chapter sets out three central hypotheses on decline in university autonomy, with illustrative examples from eight qualitative case studies (Bangladesh, Brazil, Egypt, India, Mozambique, Poland, Russia, and Turkey) and the Academic Freedom Index data (AFI). The three hypotheses are the following: First, that a major decline in university autonomy is typically coupled with a broader decline in democracy and the rule of law in a country. Second, that excessive government interference with university autonomy focuses on governance, particularly on who leads the institution, or can manifest in excessive state regulation. Third, attacking university autonomy is an effective way to undermine academic freedom, but not the only way, and there is no typical sequence in the kinds of attacks that target academic freedom.

Suggested Citation

  • Roberts Lyer, Kirsten & Saliba, Ilyas & Spannagel, Janika, 2023. "Hypotheses on Institutional Autonomy Decline," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 177-193.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:266360
    DOI: 10.4324/9781003306481-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/266360/1/Full-text-chapter-Roberts_Lyer-et-al-Hypotheses-on-institutional.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.4324/9781003306481-12?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. Osmundsen, Mathias & Bor, Alexander & Vahlstrup, Peter Bjerregaard & Bechmann, Anja & Petersen, Michael Bang, 2021. "Partisan Polarization Is the Primary Psychological Motivation behind Political Fake News Sharing on Twitter," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(3), pages 999-1015, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. François t'Serstevens & Roberto Cerina & Giulia Piccillo, 2024. "Mapping the Risk of Spreading Fake-News via Wisdom-of-the-Crowd & MrP," CESifo Working Paper Series 11138, CESifo.
    2. Eugen Dimant, 2020. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 029, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    3. James N. Druckman & Donald P. Green & Shanto Iyengar, 2023. "Does Affective Polarization Contribute to Democratic Backsliding in America?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 708(1), pages 137-163, July.
    4. Raúl Rodríguez-Ferrándiz, 2023. "An Overview of the Fake News Phenomenon: From Untruth-Driven to Post-Truth-Driven Approaches," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(2), pages 15-29.
    5. Fève, Patrick & Assenza, Tiziana & Collard, Fabrice & Huber, Stefanie, 2024. "From Buzz to Bust: How Fake News Shapes the Business Cycle," TSE Working Papers 24-1516, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    6. Jens Foerderer, 2023. "Should we trust web-scraped data?," Papers 2308.02231, arXiv.org.
    7. Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand, 2022. "Nudging Social Media toward Accuracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 152-164, March.
    8. Zeng, Jing & Brennen, Scott Babwah, 2023. "Misinformation," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 12(4), pages 1-20.
    9. Adrian Kwek & Luke Peh & Josef Tan & Jin Xing Lee, 2023. "Distractions, analytical thinking and falling for fake news: A survey of psychological factors," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-12, December.
    10. Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2022. "Measuring exposure to misinformation from political elites on Twitter," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    11. Mason Youngblood & Joseph M. Stubbersfield & Olivier Morin & Ryan Glassman & Alberto Acerbi, 2023. "Negativity bias in the spread of voter fraud conspiracy theory tweets during the 2020 US election," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    12. Jana Lasser & Segun T. Aroyehun & Fabio Carrella & Almog Simchon & David Garcia & Stephan Lewandowsky, 2023. "From alternative conceptions of honesty to alternative facts in communications by US politicians," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(12), pages 2140-2151, December.
    13. Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand, 2022. "Accuracy prompts are a replicable and generalizable approach for reducing the spread of misinformation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    14. Steve Rathje & Jon Roozenbeek & Jay J. Bavel & Sander Linden, 2023. "Accuracy and social motivations shape judgements of (mis)information," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(6), pages 892-903, June.
    15. Çiğdem Bozdağ & Suncem Koçer, 2022. "Skeptical Inertia in the Face of Polarization: News Consumption and Misinformation in Turkey," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(2), pages 169-179.
    16. Elena Llorca-Asensi & Alexander Sánchez Díaz & Maria-Elena Fabregat-Cabrera & Raúl Ruiz-Callado, 2021. "“Why Can’t We?” Disinformation and Right to Self-Determination. The Catalan Conflict on Twitter," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-23, 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:zbw:espost:266360. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.