Confronting Yourself: Reflections on Academic Publication in Doctoral Study

• Authors: Atiqur Rahman , Yasmin Jahan

Abstracts

EN

Scholarly publication is a leading requirement for the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) program. Publishing articles, therefore, has become an appealing expectation for early-stage doctoral researchers (ESDRs). However, little has been done to address the dynamic relationship between the PhD and the academic publication system. The purpose of this study is to understand the intricately intertwined structures of PhD study and to explore the challenges related to scholarly publication. A group discussion method was deployed for data collection by recruiting international ESDRs (n=15) from three different countries. Primary results indicate that common anxiety is associated with the requirement to publish in high impact factor journals as well as the publication process. Quality supervision is recognized as inevitable to improve a mentor-mentee relationship and was found helpful in reducing the barriers to scientific publication. Moreover, the dominant structural factors of PhD study determine the ESDRs’ decision-making. The study suggests that the PhD study should remain research-intensive rather than simply for the sake of obtaining a higher qualification.

Keywords

EN

Doctoral study; early stage researcher; journal impact factor; publication

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Adam Marszałek
• Journal: The New Educational Review
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 59
• Pages: 147-159

Dates

published

2020

Contributors

author

Atiqur Rahman

• Linköping University

author

Yasmin Jahan

• Hiroshima University

References

• Abramo, G., D’Angelo, C.A., & Di Costa, F. (2011). Research productivity: Are higher academic ranks more productive than lower ones? Scientometrics, 88(3), 915-928.
• Acker, S. (2000). In/out/side: Positioning the researcher in feminist qualitative research. Resources for feminist research, 28(1-2), 189-210.
• Aiken, L.S., West, S.G., Sechrest, L., Reno, R.R., Roediger III, H.L., Scarr, S.,.Sherman, S.J. (1990). Graduate training in statistics, methodology, and measurement in psychology: A survey of PhD programs in North America. American Psychologist, 45(6), 721.
• Aksnes, D.W., Rorstad, K., Piro, F., & Sivertsen, G. (2011). Are female researchers less cited? A large‐scale study of Norwegian scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(4), 628-636.
• Björk, B.C., Roos, A., & Lauri, M. (2009). Scientific journal publishing: yearly volume and open access availability. Information Research, 14.
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
• Bromham, L., Dinnage, R., & Hua, X. (2016). Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success. Nature, 534(7609), 684.
• Can, G., & Walker, A. (2011). A model for doctoral students’ perceptions and attitudes toward written feedback for academic writing. Research in Higher Education, 52(5), 508-536.
• Davies, R.E., & Rolfe, G. (2009). PhD by publication: A prospective as well as retrospective award? Some subversive thoughts. Nurse Education Today, 29(6), 590-594.
• Davis, H., Evans, T., & Hickey, C. (2006). A knowledge-based economy landscape: Implications for tertiary education and research training in Australia. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 28(3), 231-244.
• Dowling, R., Gorman-Murray, A., Power, E., & Luzia, K. (2012). Critical reflections on doctoral research and supervision in human geography: The ‘PhD by publication’. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 36(2), 293-305.
• Gardner, S.K., & Gopaul, B. (2012). The part-time doctoral student experience. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 63-78.
• Graneheim U.H. & Lundman B. (2004) Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today 24, 105-112.
• Gunnarsson, R., Jonasson, G., & Billhult, A. (2013). The experience of disagreement between students and supervisors in PhD education: a qualitative study. BMC medical education, 13(1), 134.
• Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., … & Hilf, E. (2004). The green and the gold roads to Open Access.
• Haslam, N., & Laham, S.M. (2010). Quality, quantity, and impact in academic publication. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(2), 216-220.
• Huang, J.C. (2010). Publishing and learning writing for publication in English: Perspectives of NNES PhD students in science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 33-44.
• Hyland, K. (2016). Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 58-69.
• Jairam, D., & Kahl Jr, D.H. (2012). Navigating the doctoral experience: The role of social support in successful degree completion. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 311-329.
• Jinha, A.E. (2010). Article 50 million: an estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence. Learned Publishing, 23(3), 258-263.
• Kamler, B. (2008). Rethinking doctoral publication practices: Writing from and beyond the thesis. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3), 283-294.
• Kehm, B.M. (2015). Higher Education as a Field of Study and Research in Europe. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 60-74.
• Levecque, K., Anseel, F., De Beuckelaer, A., Van der Heyden, J., & Gisle, L. (2017). Work organization and mental health problems in PhD students. Research Policy, 46(4), 868-879.
• Mabe, M. (2003). The growth and number of journals. Serials, 16(2), 191-198.
• Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Merton, R.K. (1963). Resistance to the systematic study of multiple discoveries in science. European Journal of Sociology/Archives Européennes de Sociologie, 4(2), 237-282.
• Moore, M.T., & Griffin, B.W. (2006). Identification of factors that influence authorship name placement and decisions to collaborate in peer-reviewed, education-related publications. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 32(2), 125-135.
• Mowbray, S., & Halse, C. (2010). The purpose of the PhD: Theorising the skills acquired by students. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(6), 653-664.
• Mulhall, A. (2003). In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research. Journal of advanced nursing, 41(3), 306-313.
• Norton, A., Cherastidtham, I., & Mackey, W. (2016). Mapping Australian higher education 2016.
• OECD. (2014). Who Are the Doctorate Holders and where Do Their Qualifications Lead Them?: OECD Publishing.
• Roberts, L. (1991). The rush to publish. In: JSTOR.
• Robins, L., & Kanowski, P. (2008). PhD by Publication: A Student’s Perspective. Journal of Research Practice, 4(2), M3.
• Seeman, J.I., & House, M.C. (2015). Authorship issues and conflict in the US academic chemical community. Accountability in research, 22(6), 346-383.
• Sharmini, S., Spronken-Smith, R., Golding, C., & Harland, T. (2015). Assessing the doctoral thesis when it includes published work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(1), 89-102.
• Tuckett, A., & Stewart, E.D. (2004). Collecting qualitative data: Part II. Group discussion as a method. Contemporary nurse: a journal for the Australian nursing profession, 16, 240-251. doi:10.5172/conu.16.3.240
• Vekkaila, J., Pyhältö, K., Hakkarainen, K., Keskinen, J., & Lonka, K. (2012). Doctoral students’ key learning experiences in the natural sciences. International Journal for Researcher Development, 3(2), 154-183.
• Winter, R., Griffiths, M., & Green, K. (2000). The’Academic’ Qualities of Practice: What are the criteria for a practice-based PhD? Studies in Higher Education, 25(1), 25-37.
• Zygouris-Coe, V., & Roberts, S.K. (2019). A Situated Framework for Socialising a Scholarship Mindset with Doctoral Students. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 14, 567-580.

Identifiers

DOI

10.15804/tner.20.59.1.12

Biblioteka Nauki

1963504