↓ Skip to main content

The Higher-Ed Organizational-Scholar Tension: How Scholarship Compatibility and the Alignment of Organizational and Faculty Skills, Values and Support Affects Scholar's Performance and Well-Being

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Higher-Ed Organizational-Scholar Tension: How Scholarship Compatibility and the Alignment of Organizational and Faculty Skills, Values and Support Affects Scholar's Performance and Well-Being
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00450
Pubmed ID
Authors

Milagros Pereyra-Rojas, Enrique Mu, James Gaskin, Tony Lingham

Abstract

Scholars and institutions alike are concerned with academic productivity. Scholars not only further knowledge in their professional fields, they also bring visibility and prestige to themselves and their institutions, which in turn attracts research grants and more qualified faculty and graduate students. Many studies have been done on scholar productivity, and many of them focus on individual factors such as gender, marital status, and individual psychological characteristics. Also, a few studies are concerned about scholars' well-being. We propose a causal model that considers the compatibility of the scholarship dimensions valued by scholars and institutions and their academic alignment with actual institutional recognition and support. We test our causal model with data from a survey of 803 faculty participants. Our findings shed light on how the above academic factors affect not just academic productivity but also a scholar's well-being. Importantly, we show that academic alignment plays a crucial mediating role when predicting productivity and well-being. These results have important implications for university administrators who develop, and faculty who work under, policies designed to foster professional development and scholarship.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 26%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Lecturer 3 7%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 11 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 6 14%
Psychology 5 12%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 7%
Arts and Humanities 3 7%
Other 11 26%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,802,093
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,014
of 30,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,499
of 310,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#400
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,112 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.