Investigating the association between publication performance and the work environment of university research academics: a systematic review

18Citations
Citations of this article
73Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The purpose of this review was to investigate the association between publication performance and the organizational and psychosocial work environment of academics in a university setting. In 2018 we conducted database searches in Web of Science, Medline and other key journals (hand-searched) from 1990 to 2017 based on population, exposure and outcome framework. We examined reference lists, and after a title and abstract scan and full-text reading we identified studies that were original research and fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Articles were evaluated as having a low, moderate or high risk of bias using a quality assessment form. From the studies (n = 32) identified and synthesized, work-environment characteristics could explain the quality and quantity aspects of publication performance of academics. Management practices, leadership and psychosocial characteristics are influential factors that affect academics’ publication productivity. Most of the reviewed studies were judged to be of moderate quality because of issues of bias, related to the measuring of publication outcome. The findings in the studies reviewed suggest that highly productive research academics and departments significantly tend to be influenced by the organizational and psychosocial characteristics of their working environment. The practical relevance of this review is that it highlights where academics’ performance needs support and how the work environment can be improved to bolster publication productivity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Aboagye, E., Jensen, I., Bergström, G., Brämberg, E. B., Pico-Espinosa, O. J., & Björklund, C. (2021). Investigating the association between publication performance and the work environment of university research academics: a systematic review. Scientometrics, 126(4), 3283–3301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03820-y

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free