6.1 A CADEMIC CULTURE AND RESEARCH CONTEXT IN STATE RESEARCH INSTITUTES 114
6.2.3 Factors influencing publishing orientations
Next, the influence of various cultural and contextual factors on publishing activity with different publishing orientations is examined.
6.2.3.1 The nature of the research
The nature of one’s research has a significant influence on publishing practices.
In the survey, respondents were asked to indicate the share of empirical and theoretical research and also the share of development/engineering and specialist/consulting work in their activities. The results indicate that different
types of research results are disseminated with different publishing orientations (see Table 31).
Table 31: The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication, by research type Professional
orientation Article
orientation Conference
orientation Industrial orientation
Theoretical research Mainly (N=56) 88 91 71 41
Less (N=579) 85 90 56 39
Empirical research Mainly (N=393) 86 93 58 35
Less (N=305) 85 86 60 44
Development/
engineering Mainly (N=143) 82 89 64 42
Less (N=535) 86 91 59 40
Specialist
work/consulting Mainly (N=133) 90 86 56 47
Less (N=576) 85 91 60 38
Total (N=638-709)* 85 90 59 39
*Because of the missing information N varies between variables
Those conducting mainly empirical and theoretical research are the most active publishers of academic articles. The percentage of those producing at least one academic article publication was significantly higher (chi-squared p = 0.004) for those doing mainly empirical research than among those conducting empirical research less frequently. Some academic journals concentrate more on basic research and others on applied research. This often leaves general journals out of the question for those conducting applied research. One of the interviewees described selection of the journal in which a study is to be published:
The best are the journals with the highest impact factors. […] Some of them [impact factors] are around 30 or even 40. But they are usually only for those working at high ranked universities and for basic research. They are publishing basic research, and because we are working in a more applied field and producing the new basic knowledge is not our core duty, our results are often applied. Because of the applied nature of the research, we are publishing in journals with lower impact factors. (I1)
The applied nature of the research has an effect on researchers’ publishing opportunities. Writing an international journal article was seen as a demanding process that takes more time than is often available. One of the interviewees
described the difficulties that the nature of the work brings to writing a journal article:
[Journal publishing] has greater meaning in theory than in practice. We are encouraged to write journal articles, but it is so demanding and it is hard to find the time for writing. […] When working at the university, I wrote quite a few articles with solid theoretical backgrounds. [Research institute’s]
research model does not always make it possible to work with theoretical research that you could cultivate into a journal article. (I12)
Those conducting mainly theoretical research were the most active publishers of conference papers. The percentage producing at least one conference-linked publication was higher (chi-squared p = 0.046) for those doing mainly theoretical research than those conducting theoretical research less frequently. The proportion of respondents producing at least one conference-related publication is also higher for those doing mainly development/engineering. Research results may also be interesting for those attending conferences, as one of the interviewees explained:
This subject is quite general. We have published mainly at technical conferences […] technical developers are interested in hearing about our results. (I12)
Producing industrial publications was most common among those conducting mainly specialist work / consulting. The percentage of those producing at least one industrial publication was significantly higher (chi-squared p = 0.038) among those doing mainly specialist work / consulting than for those performing such work less frequently. In research assignments, confidentiality agreements may prevent publishing; therefore, results may be published only for the customer, in the form of confidential research reports.
We don’t have permission to publish anything from research assignments if we don’t ask for it. (I3)
Even without confidentiality agreements, one problem in working with research assignments is that researchers are often unable to collect research data that could be used for writing academic publications. The data series are too small and specific for cultivation into academic articles.
There is something we might publish, but it is quite rare because we cannot collect long time series, as on a yearly basis the customers dictate the quantities. […] It is possible for the same control substances to be used for five years, but usually things are developing; they are reducing the quantities and changing the spraying times and so on […] so collecting scientific data is quite hard. (I4)
Conducting specialist work / consulting is also linked to professional publishing orientation. The percentage of respondents producing at least one professional publication is the highest for those performing mainly specialist work / consulting.
One of the interviewees saw professional magazines as a more natural publishing channel for his research:
I like professional publications, because, in my opinion, articles in professional magazines go straight to the customers, those who are using the information. Academic publications are mainly for other scientists. […]
I like to hang around more in these industrial circles. (I2)
6.2.3.2 Dependence on other fields
Dependence on knowledge produced in other research fields varies considerably between disciplines (see section 6.1.2). Some disciplines rely more on knowledge produced in other fields than others do. In the survey, dependence on other fields was measured by asking to what extent the respondents use literature from their own and other scientific fields. According to the results, the extent of using literature from other fields has some impact on publishing practices (see Table 32).
Professional publishing is connected to using literature from various fields.
Professional publishing activity differs significantly by level of use of literature (ANOVA, df = 2, F = 2.679, p = 0.05). Those using literature from various fields publish significantly more with a professional orientation when compared to those using literature mainly from their own field (Tamhane p = 0.05). There is also some evidence that those using literature from various fields are more active in producing industrial publications than are those who rely mainly on literature produced in their own field. However, differences are not significant between groups (ANOVA df = 2, F = 0.399, p = 0.671).
Those using literature mainly from their own field are the most active publishers of academic articles. However differences between groups in amount of
publishing activity are not significant (ANOVA df = 2, F = 2.497, p = 0.083). One of the interviewees described the problems in multidisciplinary research with recognising novel and significant research results. Sometimes it might be hard to find an appropriate academic publishing forum for multidisciplinary results.
It’s the transdisciplinarity that we have and the nature of applied research that makes entities quite large. In the end, what is the new knowledge? (I7)
Those using literature to ‘some’ extent from their own and other fields publish more conference papers than do those using literature mainly from their own field or various fields. However, differences between groups in conference publishing activity are not significant.
Table 32: The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication, by extent, using literature from their own field and other fields
Professional
orientation Article
orientation Conference
orientation Industrial orientation Mainly from my own field
(N=269-304)* 84 93 58 38
To some extent from other
fields (N=291-305)* 85 89 64 38
From various fields
(N=116-122)* 89 89 56 42
Total (N=703-731)* 85 91 60 39
*Because of the missing information N varies between variables
6.2.3.3 Dependence between researchers
Dependence between researchers is another cultural factor that varies between disciplines (see section 6.1.3). Dependence between researchers was examined by asking the typical number of co-authors respondents have for their academic publications. Those publishing alone or in a small group of authors are the most active publishers in professional and industrial orientations (see Table 31).
The percentage of respondents producing at least one professional publication and industrial publication is significantly higher (chi-squared p < 0.05) for those who typically publish alone or with one or two co-authors as compared to those publishing with more co-authors. On the other hand, the percentage of respondents producing at least one academic publication is higher (chi squared p = 0.066) among those who typically publish in a large group than among those who typically publish alone or in a small group.
Table 33: The percentage of respondents who had at least one publication with a given number of co-authors
Professional
orientation Article
orientation Conference
orientation Industrial orientation Alone or as a small group
(N=341-356)* 90 90 61 43
Large group (N=344-353)* 82 94 62 35
Total (N=685-709)* 86 92 61 39
*Because of the missing information N varies between variables
6.2.3.4 Research collaboration
Research is done in different contexts, and the context affects researchers’
ability and need to communicate their research results, quite considerably.
Collaboration partners are one of the contextual factors examined in this study.
Respondents were asked with which organisations and to what extent they engaged in research or publishing collaboration (see Table 34).
Both professional and academic publishing are associated with regular collaboration with Finnish and foreign universities and state research institutes.
The percentage of those producing at least one professional publication and at least one academic publication is significantly higher (chi-squared p < 0.05) for those respondents engaging in regular collaboration with Finnish and foreign universities and (domestic and foreign) state research institutes than for those who were collaborating less frequently with these organisations. One of the interviewees experienced academic publishing as especially important for universities; academic publishing was an important part of the work when the collaborating involved researchers from universities.
If the project is very busy, it might be that there is no time to write academic stuff. The emphasis is on what companies want. But usually especially professors from universities require that researchers have time to do some academic writing, because it is important for the departments.
Otherwise, it would not be useful for universities to be involved. (I10) Conference publishing is related, on one hand, to collaborating with academic organisations and, on the other hand, to the private sector. The percentage having produced at least one conference paper is significantly higher (chi-squared p <
0.05) among those engaging in regular collaboration with Finnish universities, Finnish and foreign state research institutes, and private-sector organisations than for those collaborating less frequently with these organisations.
Industrial publishing is associated with collaboration with private-sector organisations. The percentage of respondents with at least one industrial publication is significantly higher (chi squared p < 0.05) for those engaging in regular collaboration with private-sector organisations than among those who collaborate with the private sector less frequently. Typically in research assignments paid for by private companies, the researchers do not know how their results are used and for what.
These days, we just write the report on our study and it is up to the company to decide what to do with it. (I5)
Table 34: The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication, by collaboration activity
6.2.3.5 Research funding
Research funding is another important contextual factor affecting publishing practices. Publications have a particularly important role when external research funding is being sought. When competition for research funding gets more intense, publishing becomes more important. Most of the interviewees saw publications as the core means of getting external research funding.
These days, [publishing] is important because all research funders have started to look at it. So if you don’t publish, and if you don’t have a credible publishing list, they don’t see you as worth granting the funding.
(I8)
Respondents were asked to indicate the importance of various types of funding sources in their work. Different funding sources are related to different publishing orientations (see Table 35).
Professional publishing correlates with working without external funding. The percentage producing at least one professional publication was higher among those working mainly without any external research funding (chi-squared p = 0.059) than among those working to a lesser extent without external funding. Also those whose main research funding came from the ministries are active professional publishers.
The proportion with at least one professional publication was significantly lower (chi-squared p = 0.001) for those working mainly with research funding from Tekes or from private companies than among those for whom these funding sources were less important.
Academic article publishing is related especially strongly to having external funding from academic research funders. The percentage of respondents producing at least one academic article publication was significantly higher (chi-squared p < 0.05) for those obtaining their main research funding from the Academy of Finland and working mainly without external funding in comparison to those for whom these funding sources were less important. One of the interviewees stressed the importance of academic publications in application for funding from the Academy of Finland. The opinion of one interviewee was that most researchers are not competent to compete for funding from the Academy of Finland, because of a lack of academic publications. Therefore, another interviewee expressed the conclusion that the research institute in question should try to change its publishing practices such that they allow competition with universities for academic research funding.
I think we should try to understand better the way universities are producing publications, especially these days as we compete for the same funding. We have to accept that, in the end, academic forums are the ones determining our academic credibility. (I9)
The percentage of those producing at least academic article was significantly lower (chi-squared p < 0.05) for those getting their main research funding from private companies or Tekes than those for whom these funding sources were less important. One reason researchers working with private companies’ funding are publishing less actively in academic forums is the confidentiality agreements with the companies. There might be also difficulties in arranging the time for writing if it has not been specified in the research contract:
We make the contract with an external funder for the work we will conduct. There is no money allocated, for example, for two months for writing an academic article. Those two months are assigned to performing the analyses and working with the data. […] It is a problem. I would like there to be the possibility to write, but there isn’t. (I2)
Conference publishing is related to working in between the academic and industrial worlds, at least from the research funding point of view. The percentage of those producing at least one conference paper was significantly higher among those whose main research funding came from Tekes (chi squared p = 0.044) than those for whom Tekes funding was less important. Usually, both Tekes and EU projects entail collaboration with research partners in the public and private sector both.
The share of production of at least one conference paper was significantly lower (chi-squared p < 0.05) for those with their main research funding from foundations or working mainly without external funding as compared to those for whom these funding sources were less important.
Industrial publishing correlates with research funding from the private sector and funders working in collaboration with the private sector. The percentage of respondents producing at least one industrial publication was significantly higher (chi-squared p < 0.05), for those with primary research funding from private companies, Tekes, and EU as compared to those for whom these funding sources were less important.
Those interviewees working mainly with research assignments were producing mainly confidential research reports. Researchers saw a contradiction between productivity metrics and customer orientation. If research is done on the customer’s terms, results are not always published. Publishing possibilities have an impact also on the career development of individual researchers. Publications are an important part of a researcher’s CV, and if one’s publications are mainly confidential research reports, CVs stay short.
We prepare a dozen of these [confidential research reports], which won’t bring you any merits. […] You cannot put them on your CV […] we don’t have any strong CVs for applying for EU funding. […] There is a conflict.
(I4)
6.2.3.6 Research projects
The nature of the research projects was the third contextual factor examined in the study. Respondents were asked about the length of a typical research project and the number of projects they were working on at the same time. Both elements have an impact on publishing practices.
Those working with longer projects are likely to publish more in academic article and professional publishing orientations (see Table 36). The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication in professional and academic article publishing orientations is significantly higher (chi squared p < 0.05) among those working in projects lasting three years or more than for those typically working on shorter projects. In short, project-oriented researchers may be unable to collect the comprehensive datasets that academic publications require, as was already pointed out.
Working with shorter projects shows an association with industrial publishing.
The percentage producing at least one industrial publication is significantly higher (chi-squared p = 0.000) for those working in projects lasting one or two years than for those working in longer projects.
Table 36: The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication, by length of research project
Professional
orientation Article
orientation Conference
orientation Industrial orientation
Two years or less (N=357-370)* 83 86 57 47
More than two years (N=353-368)* 89 95 63 31
Total (N=710-738)* 86 90 60 39
*Because of the missing information N varies between variables
In general, those working with a number of projects at the same time are likely to be more productive in every publishing orientation (see Table 37). The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication in significantly higher (chi-squared p < 0.05) in every publishing orientation for those working with three or more projects at the same time as compared to those who work with one or two projects. However, in the interviews, researchers saw a large number of short projects as problematic when it comes to publishing.
The problem – why people are publishing so little – is that they have too many short projects taking all the time. It’s a time management issue, because there are no shortcuts for writing publications: you just have to write, and that requires time. An hour per day is not enough; you need days for it. (I6)
Table 37: The percentage of respondents producing at least one publication, broken down by number of projects in progress simultaneously
Professional
orientation Article
orientation Conference
orientation Industrial orientation
One or two (N=261-274)* 82 87 55 29
Three or more (N=441-455)* 88 92 63 45
Total (N=702-729)* 86 90 60 39
*Because of the missing information N varies between variables