Purpose: With the growth of knowledge and increasing competition, the assessment of scientific articles has become a challenging issue. Previous research suggests that multiple variables influence the number of academic articles. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the relationship between the beginning of chancellorship in top-ranked universities and the number of chancellors’ articles.
Design/methodology/approach: Chancellors of 200 top universities worldwide were randomly selected from the top 1,000 universities listed on the topuniversities.com profile page. Data were collected through the Scopus Database using a checklist that contained variables such as gender, age, being active or non-active, and continent. The mean number of articles during the period of three years before the beginning of the chancellorship until three years after that was compared using the Friedman test.
Findings: Considering the starting point of the chancellorship, the data showed that the mean number of published articles per year decreased significantly after beginning the chancellorship. Among the chancellors, active chancellors (having a minimum of one article each year), male chancellors, and those from North America indicated a decrease in the number of publications.
Research limitations: A major limitation was that in some universities, governance falls under vice-chancellor(s) rather than chancellor (s).
Practical implications: The study underscores the difficulty of balancing administrative responsibilities, such as university chancellorship, with academic pursuits.
Originality/value: For the first time, the results revealed that beginning chancellorship negatively impacts publication output.
Amir Amani, Mohammad Reza Armat, Samaneh Mollazadeh, Reza Salarinia, Mitra Salehi, Sonia Fathi-karkan, Akbar Solati
. University chancellorship and research productivity: An investigation of the number of published articles[J]. Journal of Data and Information Science, 0
: 23
-23
.
DOI: 10.2478/jdis-2025-0023
[1] Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., & Caprasecca A. (2009). Gender differences in research productivity: A bibliometric analysis of the Italian academic system.Scientometrics, 79, 517-539.
[2] Abramo G., D’Angelo C. A., & Murgia G. (2016). The combined effects of age and seniority on research performance of full professors.Science and Public Policy, 43(3), 301-319.
[3] Blackburn R. T.,& Lawrence, J. H. (1995). Faculty at work: Motivation, expectation, satisfaction Johns Hopkins University Press Motivation, expectation, satisfaction. Johns Hopkins University Press.
[4] Bonaccorsi, A., & Daraio, C. (2003). Age effects in scientific productivity.Scientometrics, 58(1), 49-90.
[5] Cole, S. (1979). Age and scientific performance.American journal of sociology, 84(4), 958-977.
[6] Dhillon S. K., Ibrahim R., & Selamat A. (2015). Factors associated with scholarly publication productivity among academic staff: Case of a Malaysian public university.Technology in Society, 42, 160-166.
[7] Dundar, H., & Lewis, D. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education.Research in Higher Education, 39(6), 607-631.
[8] Fox, M. F. (1983). Publication productivity among scientists: A critical review.Social studies of science, 13(2), 285-305.
[9] Gingras Y., Lariviere V., Macaluso B., & Robitaille J.-P. (2008). The effects of aging on researchers’ publication and citation patterns.PLoS One, 3(12), e4048.
[10] Goodall A. H.(2009). Socrates in the boardroom: Why research universities should be led by top scholars. Princeton University Press.
[11] Jia R., Nie H., & Xiao W. (2019). Power and publications in Chinese academia.Journal of Comparative Economics, 47(4), 792-805.
[12] Knorr K., Mittermeir R., Aichholzer G., & Waller, G. (1979). Individual publication productivity as a social position effect in academic and industrial research units. In F. Andrews (Ed.), Scientific productivity: The effectiveness of research groups in six countries. Cambridge University Press.
[13] Kyvik, S. (1990). Age and scientific productivity. Differences between fields of learning.Higher Education, 19(1), 37-55.
[14] Kyvik, S. (1993). Academic staff and scientific production.Higher Education Management, 5(2), 191-202.
[15] Kyvik, S., & Teigen, M. (1996). Child care, research collaboration, and gender differences in scientific productivity.Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21(1), 54-71.
[16] Lima H., Silva T. H., Moro M. M., Santos R. L., Meira W., & Laender A. H. (2015). Assessing the profile of top Brazilian computer science researchers.Scientometrics, 103(3), 879-896.
[17] Oster, S. M., & Hamermesh, D. S. (1998). Aging and productivity among economists.Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 154-156.
[18] Parker J. N., Allesina S., & Lortie C. J. (2013). Characterizing a scientific elite (B): Publication and citation patterns of the most highly cited scientists in environmental science and ecology.Scientometrics, 94, 469-480.
[19] Puuska, H.-M. (2010). Effects of scholar’s gender and professional position on publishing productivity in different publication types. Analysis of a Finnish university.Scientometrics, 82(2), 419-437.
[20] Ramesh Babu, A., & Singh, Y. (1998). Determinants of research productivity.Scientometrics, 43(3), 309-329.
[21] Ramsden, P. (1994). Describing and explaining research productivity.Higher education, 28(2), 207-226.
[22] Rørstad, K., & Aksnes, D. W. (2015). Publication rate expressed by age, gender and academic position-A large-scale analysis of Norwegian academic staff.Journal of informetrics, 9(2), 317-333.
[23] Schilke O., Reimann M., & Cook K. S. (2015). Power decreases trust in social exchange.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(42), 12950-12955.
[24] Shin, J., & Cummings, W. (2010). Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: Research preference, collaboration, and time on research.Scientometrics, 85(2), 581-594.
[25] Wahid N., Warraich N. F., & Tahira M. (2022). Factors influencing scholarly publication productivity: A systematic review.Information Discovery and Delivery, 50(1), 22-33.
[26] Wallner B., Fieder M., & Iber K. (2003). Age profile, personnel costs and scientific productivity at the University of Vienna.Scientometrics, 58(1), 143-153.
[27] Way S. F., Morgan A. C., Clauset A., & Larremore D. B. (2017). The misleading narrative of the canonical faculty productivity trajectory.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114(44), E9216-E9223.
[28] Williams, H. A. (2001). A critical review of research and statistical methodologies within human resource development quarterly, Academy of Management Journal, and Personnel Psychology, 1995-1999. In ProceedingsAHRD 2001 conference (pp.34-3).
[29] Xie, Y., & Shauman, K. A. (1998). Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle.American sociological review, 63, 847-870.
