Reflecting on Motivations: How Reasons to Publish affect Research Behaviour in Astronomy

Julia Heuritsch
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281613
2023-11-06
Abstract:Recent research in the field of reflexive metrics have studied the emergence and consequences of evaluation gaps in science. The concept of evaluation gaps captures potential discrepancies between what researchers value about their research, in particular research quality, and what metrics measure. As a result, scientists may experience anomie and adopt innovative ways to cope. These often value quantity over quality and may even compromise research integrity. A consequence of such gaps may therefore be research misconduct and a decrease in research quality. In the language of rational choice theory, an evaluation gap persists if motivational factors arising out of the internal component of an actors situation are incongruent with those arising out of the external components. The aim of this research is therefore to study and compare autonomous and controlled motivations to become an astronomer, to do research in astronomy and to publish scientific papers. Moreover, we study how these different motivational factors affect publication pressure, the experience of organisational justice and the observation of research misconduct. In summary, we find evidence for an evaluation gap and that controlled motivational factors arising from evaluation procedures based on publication record drives up publication pressure, which, in turn, was found to increase the likelihood of perceived frequency of misbehaviour.
Physics and Society,Instrumentation and Methods for Astrophysics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The problem that this paper attempts to solve is the relationship between motivation and behavior in astronomical research, especially the influence of autonomous motivation (self - determined motivation) and controlled motivation (controlled motivation) on researchers becoming astronomers, conducting astronomical research, and publishing scientific papers. Specifically, the paper focuses on the following points: 1. **Motivation differences**: Compare the differences between autonomous motivation and controlled motivation for astronomers to become astronomers, conduct research, and publish papers. 2. **Publication pressure**: Explore how different types of motivation affect the publication pressure perceived by researchers. 3. **Organizational justice perception**: Study how motivation affects researchers' perception of organizational fairness. 4. **Over - commitment to work**: Analyze how motivation affects researchers' over - commitment to work. 5. **Research misconduct**: Explore how motivation affects the frequency of research misconduct observed by researchers. The paper systematically analyzes these motivational factors and their influence on research behavior through the method of quantitative survey, combined with Rational Choice Theory (RCT), Organizational Culture Theory (OCT), and Self - Determination Theory (SDT). The research hypotheses include: - **H1**: Astronomers choose this profession more out of autonomous motivation than controlled motivation. - **H2**: Astronomers have greater controlled motivation than autonomous motivation to publish papers. - **H3**: Researchers for whom the publication requirement poses a greater threat to their academic careers (such as early - career researchers and female researchers in male - dominated fields) will feel less autonomous motivation and more controlled motivation. - **H4**: Higher autonomous motivation to become an astronomer and publish papers will reduce the likelihood of leaving academia or resigning, while higher controlled motivation will increase this likelihood. - **H5**: Higher autonomous motivation to become an astronomer and publish papers will increase researchers' love for their work, while higher controlled motivation will reduce this love. - **H6**: The perceived publication pressure increases with the increase of the controlled motivation to publish papers and decreases with the increase of the autonomous motivation. - **H7**: The perceived work engagement increases with the increase of the controlled motivation to publish papers and decreases with the increase of the autonomous motivation. - **H8**: The perceived work rewards increase with the decrease of the controlled motivation to publish papers and increase with the increase of the autonomous motivation. - **H9**: The perceived over - commitment to work increases with the increase of the autonomous motivation to become an astronomer and the external, introjected, and identified regulations of publishing papers. - **H10**: The frequency of observed research misconduct increases with the decrease of the autonomous motivation to become an astronomer and publish papers and increases with the increase of the controlled motivation, external, and introjected regulations. Through these hypotheses, the paper aims to reveal how the types of motivation affect the research behavior and mental state of astronomers, thereby providing a basis for improving the scientific research environment and enhancing the research quality.