Scientific impact at the expense of happiness? Work/life balance in performance-driven research careers

Abstract

Research evaluation systems place increasing emphasis on scientific impact, yet their consequences for researchers themselves remain underexplored. This paper addresses this gap by examining how scientific impact affects researcher happiness. While scientific impact is essential to progress and may be intrinsically rewarding, it also subjects researchers to intense competitive pressures, particularly when career advancement depends on performance metrics. Drawing on Self-Determination Theory, we explain how the pursuit of externally rewarded outcomes may undermine eudaimonic happiness—the deep fulfilment derived from meaningful and self-concordant activity. Using one of the largest two-wave surveys of researchers to date (over 2,400 Spanish academics), we find that scientific impact paradoxically reduces happiness. The analysis addresses potential endogeneity, common method, and desirability biases. We show that work/personal life balance mediates the negative relationship between impact and happiness. Moreover, prosocial motivation and creativity moderate this pathway. Researchers with altruistic aims or creative engagement report greater happiness, even under high-impact pressure. Notably, tenure enables creativity to exert this positive effect, underlining the importance of stable academic contexts. These findings suggest that evaluation systems centred on scientific impact may inadvertently undermine researcher well-being, with potential consequences for motivation, creativity, and the sustainability of the research enterprise.