首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics >Insights Into University Knowledge Transfer in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) and Other Scientific Disciplines – More Similarities Than Differences
【24h】

Insights Into University Knowledge Transfer in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) and Other Scientific Disciplines – More Similarities Than Differences

机译:对社会科学和人文科学(SSH)和其他科学学科中大学知识转移的见解–异同多于

获取原文
           

摘要

Knowledge transfer from universities to other portions of society is highly relevant in both academia and public policy. However, the focus on high-quality research outputs has forced researchers to concentrate their efforts mainly on ‘science-to-science’ achievements. Knowledge transfer activities are usually reduced to topics that are associated with university-industry collaboration or the exploitation of research results, such as procurement of patents. Achievements in fields characterized by ‘science-to-professionals’ and ‘science-to-public’ knowledge transfer are often not appreciated, but rather evaluated as extraordinary and voluntary contributions. Therefore, these are deemed as not beneficial for progression in academic careers. Furthermore, study of such aspects of knowledge transfer has rarely been conducted. While the reduction of knowledge transfer to profit-oriented indicators should in general be questioned, such an objective is particularly inappropriate in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). In the current study, we explored whether researchers themselves have a differentiated understanding of knowledge transfer and which attitudes towards knowledge transfer can be described. We also investigated motivators and obstacles associated with knowledge transfer itself. To analyze differences between the SSH and other scientific disciplines, we compared SSH researchers with those of other fields. Our sample consisted of 283 participants from 18 different Austrian universities. Results indicate that researchers possess a comprehensive understanding of knowledge transfer that is closely related to science-to-public and science-to-professionals disciplines, as well as university instruction. Importantly, issues regarding the exploitation of research results were questioned and motivators were linked to moral rather than economic issues. Within the scientific community, knowledge transfer is insufficiently appreciated and is not beneficial for progress in an academic career. As such, researchers are hindered in participating in knowledge transfer activities. Differences between SSH and non-SSH researchers were noted in several evaluated categories, but were mainly small in effect size. Both subsamples answered consistently along the same trend, indicating that the differences are smaller than we hypothesized. Our findings are critically discussed, and implications are extrapolated.
机译:从大学到社会其他部分的知识转移在学术界和公共政策中都高度相关。但是,对高​​质量研究成果的关注迫使研究人员将精力主要集中在“科学对科学”的成就上。知识转移活动通常被简化为与大学与产业界合作或利用研究成果(例如专利采购)相关的主题。在以“科学到专业”和“科学到公共”知识转移为特征的领域中取得的成就通常不被赞赏,而是被认为是非凡和自愿的贡献。因此,这些被认为对学术职业发展无益。此外,很少对知识转移的这些方面进行研究。虽然通常应该质疑将知识转移减少到以利润为导向的指标,但这种目标在社会科学和人文科学(SSH)中尤其不合适。在当前的研究中,我们探讨了研究人员本身是否对知识转移有不同的理解,以及可以描述对知识转移的态度。我们还研究了与知识转移本身相关的动机和障碍。为了分析SSH与其他科学学科之间的差异,我们将SSH研究人员与其他领域的研究人员进行了比较。我们的样本包括来自18所奥地利大学的283名参与者。结果表明,研究人员对知识转移具有广泛的了解,这与科学,公共和科学与专业学科以及大学教学密切相关。重要的是,有关利用研究成果的问题受到质疑,激励因素与道德而非经济问题相关。在科学界内部,对知识转移的认识不足,并且不利于学术事业的发展。因此,研究人员无法参加知识转移活动。 SSH和非SSH研究人员之间的差异在几个评估类别中有所记录,但主要是影响大小较小。两个子样本沿相同趋势一致回答,表明差异小于我们的假设。我们的研究结果进行了严格讨论,并暗示了其含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号