Science reward system and alternative ways of assessing social impact

perceptions of researchers utilizing the bourdieusian theoretical framework

Authors

  • Marcia Regina Silva Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto
  • João de Melo Maricato Universidade de Brasília

Keywords:

Science reward system, Altmetrics, Symbolic Capital, Pierre Bourdieu.

Abstract

The emergence of new ways to disseminate and evaluate scientific output through online attention introduces additional elements to be considered as symbolic capital in the quest for scientific recognition. This research aims to understand whether, by employing the theoretical framework of the scientific field proposed by Bourdieu, researchers seek to acquire symbolic capital and measure the social impact of their work, considering online attention and altmetric indicators associated with their publications on social media. This study, theoretical-reflective and exploratory, examines a questionnaire applied to authors. Most researchers disseminate their results on social networks but are unaware of the altmetric prominence of their work related to bourdieusian themes. There is a preference for social media with greater reach, reflecting a search for enhanced social visibility. A significant portion of researchers view altmetric indicators as potential representatives of symbolic capital, valuing these metrics beyond the academic sphere. The process of adapting to emerging practices of scientific dissemination on social media is still consolidating in the scientific community, as evidenced by the absence of active monitoring of social attention directed at publications.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Marcia Regina Silva, Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Filosofia, Ciências e Letras de Ribeirão Preto

Departamento de Educação, Comunicação e Informação. Área Organização da Informação.

João de Melo Maricato, Universidade de Brasília

Doutor em Ciência da Informação pela Universidade de São Paulo – USP, Brasil. Professor do Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência da Informação da Universidade de Brasília – UnB

References

ALI-KHAN, S. E.; HARRIS, L. W.; GOLD, E. R. Point of view: motivating participation in open science by examining researcher incentives. eLife, v. 6, e29319, 2017. Disponível em: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3062340. Acesso em: 20 jul. 2021.

ANGELO, E. S. et al. Repercussão do Plan S na América Latina: análise altmétrica de dados de interação no Twitter. Bibliotecas. Anales de Investigación, v. 16, n. 3, p. 183-191, 2020. Disponível em: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8320374. Acesso em 10 jan. 2022.

ARAUJO, R. Communities of attention networks: introducing qualitative and conversational perspectives for altmetrics. Scientometrics, v. 124, p. 1793–1809, 2020. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03566-7. Acesso em 10 dez. 2021.

AUNG, H. H. et al. (2019). Investigating familiarity and usage of traditional metrics and altmetrics. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, v. 70, n. 8, p. 872– 887. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24162. Acesso em: 10 abril 2022.

Bar-Ilan, J. Ebooks and ebook chapters on Mendeley: work in progress. Presented at the Altmetrics16 workshop. 2016. Disponível em: http://altmetrics.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/09/altmetrics16_paper_9.pd. Acesso em: 10 fev. 2024.

BAKKER, C. et al. (2019). How faculty demonstrate impact: a multi-institutional study of faculty understandings, perceptions, and strategies regarding impact metrics. Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Conference. Disponível em: https://scholar.valpo.edu/ccls_fac_presentations/20. Acesso em: 10 abril 2022.

BENEDICTUS, R.; MIEDEMA, F.; FERGUSON, M. W.J. Fewer numbers, better science. Nature, v. 538, n.7626, p. 453 – 455, 2016. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1038/538453a. Acesso em 10 jan. 2022.

BOURDIEU, P. Le capital social: notes provisoires. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales, v. 31, n. 1, p. 29-34, 1980.

BOURDIEU, P. Os usos sociais da ciência: por uma sociologia clínica do campo científico. São Paulo: Editora UNESP, 2004.

BOURDIEU, P. The rules of art: genesis and structure of the literary field. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1996.

CARVALHO, C. A.; VIEIRA, M. F. Sociedade, Organizações e Poder. In: CARVALHO, C. A.; VIEIRA, M. F. O poder nas organizações. São Paulo: Thomson Learning, 2007. p. 7-34.

COLEMAN, J. S. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, v. 1, p. S95–120, 1988. Disponível em: https://faculty.washington.edu/matsueda/courses/587/readings/Coleman%201988.pdf. Acesso em: 20 jul. 2021.

DeSanto, D.; Nichols, A. Scholarly metrics baseline: A survey of faculty knowledge, use, and opinion about scholarly metrics. College & Research Libraries, v. 78, n. 2, p. 150, 2017. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.2.150. Acesso em: 10 abril 2022.

DESROCHERS, N. et al. Authorship, citations, acknowledgments and visibility in social media: Symbolic capital in the multifaceted reward system of science. Social Science Information, v. 57, n. 2, p. 223–248, 2018. Disponível em: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0539018417752089. Acesso em: 10 set. 2021.

FIELD, J. Social capital. London: Routledge, 2008.

HAUSTEIN, S.; BOWMAN, T. D.; COSTAS, R. Communitiesof attention around journal papers: who is tweeting about scien-tific publications. Paper presented at the Social Media and Society 2015 International Conference, Toronto, Canada. 2015. Disponível em: https://es.slideshare.net/StefanieHaustein/communities-of-attention-around-journal-papers-who-is-tweeting-about-scientific-publicatio. Acesso em: 09 jul. 2021.

IOANNIDIS, J. Shake up research rewards to improve accuracy, says Stanford's. 2014. Disponível em: https://scopeblog.stanford.edu/2014/10/21/shake-up-research-rewards-to-improve-accuracy-says-stanfords-john-ioannidis. Acesso em: 05 jun. 2021.

LEYDESDORFF, L; WAGNER, C.S.; BORNMANN, L. Betweenness and diversity in journal citation networks as measures of interdisciplinarity—A tribute to Eugene Garfield. Scientometrics, v. 114, p. 567–592, 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2528-2. Acesso em 10 jan. 2022.

LIN, N. Social capital: a theory of social structure and action. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001, 292 p.

MARICATO, J. M.; VILAN FILHO, J. L. The potential for altmetrics to measure other types of impact in scientific production: academic and social impact dynamics in social media and networks. Information Research, Boras, v. 23, n. 68, p. 48-68, 2018. Disponível em: http://informationr.net/ir/23-1/paper780.html. Acesso em: 15 jul. 2021.

MERTON, R. K. Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, v. 22, n. 6, p. 635-659, 1957. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2089193. Acesso em: 20 jul. 2021.

MODOLO, D. R. O ato de curtir: a estandardização da responsividade no facebook. Linguagem em (Dis)curso – LemD, Tubarão, SC, v. 18, n. 3, p. 623-645, set./dez. 2018. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-4017-180310-15017. Acesso em: 10 abr. 2022

MOHAMMADI, E.; THELWALL, M.; KOUSHA, K. Can Mendeley bookmarks reflect readership? A survey of user motivations. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2015. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23477. Acesso em: 20 jan. 2022.

OWEN, |R.; MACNAGHTEN, P.; STILGOE, J. Responsible research and innovation: from science in society to science for society, with Society. Science and Public Policy, v. 39, n. 6, p. 751-760, dec. 2012. Disponível em: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scs093. Acesso em: 10 dez. 2021.

PRADO, J. M. K.; PINTO, A. L. Planejamento de marketing para periódicos científicos de acesso aberto. Em Questão, Porto Alegre, v. 27, n. 3, p. 375-400, jul./set. 2021. Disponível em: http://dx.doi.org/10.19132/1808-5245273.375-400. Acesso em: 10 nov.2021.

SILVA, M. R. da. Crédito científico e métricas alternativas: possíveis aproximações. In: LUCAS, E. R. O.; SILVEIRA, M. A. (org.). A Ciência da Informação encontra Bourdieu. Recife: Ed. UFPE, 2017.

SUGIMOTO, C. R. et al. Scientists have most impact when they’re free to move. Nature, v. 550, n. 7674, p. 29–31, 2017. Disponível em: https://www.nature.com/articles/550029a. Acesso em: 15 out. 2021.

VILLANOVA, A. P. Distinção e o posicionamento no campo: possíveis conexões a partir dos bolsistas de produtividade em pesquisa do CNPq em Ciência da Informação. Dissertação (Mestrado) – Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade, Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, 2020.

VILLANOVA, A. P.; SILVA, M. R. da. Reflexões sobre a desigualdade no campo acadêmico reveladas por indicadores bibliométricos. In: SEMINÁRIO INFORMAÇÃO, INOVAÇÃO E SOCIEDADE, São Carlos, 2018. São Carlos: UFSCar, 2018.

Published

2024-09-13

How to Cite

Silva, M. R., & Maricato, J. de M. (2024). Science reward system and alternative ways of assessing social impact: perceptions of researchers utilizing the bourdieusian theoretical framework. Informação &Amp; Sociedade, 33. Retrieved from https://periodicos.ufpb.br/index.php/ies/article/view/67818

Issue

Section

Artigos de Revisão