Early career researchers: Scholarly behaviour and the prospect of change

Early career researchers (ECRs) are of great interest because they are the new (and biggest) wave of researchers. They merit long and detailed investigation, and towards this end, this overarching paper provides a summary of the first‐year findings of a 3‐year, longitudinal study of 116 science and social science ECRs who have published nearly 1,200 papers and come from 7 countries and 81 universities. ECRs were interviewed in their own languages face‐to‐face, by Skype, or telephone. The study focused on the attitudes and behaviours of ECRs with respect to scholarly communications and the extent to which they are adopting new and disruptive technologies, such as social media, online communities, and Open Science. The main findings include: publishing in high‐impact factor journals is the only reputational game in town; online scholarly communities, and ResearchGate in particular, are gaining ground; social media are beginning to have an impact, especially in the dissemination arena; outreach activities have become more important; libraries are becoming increasingly invisible to ECRs; Open Science is not gaining traction; and more transformational ideas are being expressed, especially in the US and UK.

[1]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Do Younger Researchers Assess Trustworthiness Differently When Deciding What to Read and Cite and Where to Publish , 2015 .

[2]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Changes in the digital scholarly environment and issues of trust: An exploratory, qualitative analysis , 2016, Inf. Process. Manag..

[3]  Ruth Müller,et al.  Postdoctoral Life Scientists and Supervision Work in the Contemporary University: A Case Study of Changes in the Cultural Norms of Science , 2014 .

[4]  David Cyranoski,et al.  Education: The PhD factory , 2011, Nature.

[5]  Hamid R. Jamali,et al.  Analysis of Emerging Reputation and Funding Mechanisms in the Context of Open Science 2.0 , 2015 .

[6]  Jochen Gläser,et al.  From apprentice to colleague: The metamorphosis of Early Career Researchers , 2008 .

[7]  Helen Burchmore,et al.  The lives and technologies of early career researchers , 2009 .

[8]  Cassidy R. Sugimoto,et al.  Bibliometrics: Global gender disparities in science , 2013, Nature.

[9]  Ruth Müller,et al.  Racing for What? Anticipation and Acceleration in the Work and Career Practices of Academic Life Science Postdocs , 2014 .

[10]  V. Larivière.  Global gender disparities in science , 2013 .

[11]  Ian Rowlands,et al.  Social media use in the research workflow , 2011 .

[12]  William Locke,et al.  The Early Career Paths and Employment Conditions of the Academic Profession in 17 Countries , 2010, European Review.

[13]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Trustworthiness and authority of scholarly information in a digital age: Results of an international questionnaire , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[14]  Lawrence Souder,et al.  The ethics of scholarly peer review: a review of the literature , 2011, Learn. Publ..

[15]  Abdullah Abrizah,et al.  Where and how early career researchers find scholarly information , 2017, Learn. Publ..

[16]  Ulrich Teichler,et al.  Forming, Recruiting and Managing the Academic Profession: A Varied Scene , 2015 .

[17]  Leo Egghe,et al.  Fallout and miss in journal peer review , 2013, J. Documentation.

[18]  Judit Bar-Ilan,et al.  Accessing, Reading and Interacting with Scientific Literature as a Factor of Academic Role , 2015 .

[19]  David F. J. Campbell,et al.  The Rocky Road to Tenure – Career Paths in Academia , 2015 .

[20]  Lutz Bornmann,et al.  Scientific peer review , 2011, Annu. Rev. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[21]  Michael Mabe.  Scholarly Communication: A Long View , 2010 .

[22]  D. Barker.  Global gender disparities in science , 2013 .

[23]  Ian Rowlands,et al.  Social media use in the research workflow , 2011, Inf. Serv. Use.

[24]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition: setting the scene for a major study , 2014, Learn. Publ..

[25]  R. Merton.  The Matthew Effect in Science , 1968, Science.

[26]  H. Laine.  The case against the journal article: The age of publisher authority is going, going, gone — and we’ll be just fine. , 2015 .

[27]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Peer review: still king in the digital age , 2015, Learn. Publ..

[28]  Executive Summary,et al.  Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines - Executive Summary , 2010 .

[29]  Jung Cheol Shin,et al.  Teaching and Research Across Higher Education Systems: Typology and Implications , 2014 .