| Abstract: |
This paper develops a better understanding of the explicit and implicit
implications of the academic field’s competitization, with a specific focus
on the role that academic social networks and platforms (ASNPs) play in this
process. By applying a mixed-methods approach combining a structural analysis
and a questionnaire study, we compare ResearchGate, Google Scholar and Twitter
and ask how and to what extent they contribute to the competitive
subjectivation of their users. Therefore, we differentiate between suggested
and enacted subjectivation, i.e., different levels of amplifying the
self-perception of a ‘competitive self.’ We particularly find that
ResearchGate, which is used by about two thirds of our respondents, offers a
broad variety of tools for competitive subjectivation, yet all three ASNPs
support the metric logic of individual research evaluation. Concerning
differences in age, gender and disciplinary background, our results show that
ASNPs are used more by younger and male researchers and these groups also
perceive their work more competitively and act more competitively. While
metric research evaluation is assessed as most important in the natural
sciences and economics and rather unimportant in the humanities, social
scientists especially perceive their work and their relation to colleagues in
a competitive context. |