Factors Influencing Research Performance in Higher Education: An Empirical Investigation

Abstract

Johann Jacob — Evaluation Project Manager. E-mail: johann.jacob@enap.ca

Moktar Lamari — Director. E-mail: moktar.lamari@enap.ca

Centre d’expertise et de recherche en évaluation de programmes (CREXE), École nationale d’administration publique, Université du Québec, Canada

Address: 555, boulevard Charest Est, Québec (Québec) G1K 9E5 

Universities play an increasingly significant role in producing new knowledge. The relationship between research inputs (grants, infrastructure spending, training of researchers) and research outputs (number of publications, citation, impact) emerges, therefore, as a strategic issue for public decision-making on funding in support of innovation and the development of competencies. Despite the abundance of empirical works on the question of researcher productivity, there is a paucity of studies dealing with this issue in the context of higher eductaion.

This paper seeks to identify the factors that explain research productivity in higher education, using as a case study, the universities in Quebec-Canada. The main hypothesis is that productivity in scientific research is significantly influenced by the volume and origin of the funding sources mobilized to support scientific research performance. We analyzed data on 194 researchers for the period of 2001–2008. Individual publications in referred journals (number of publications, fractioned publications, citations, impacts) were used as indicators for research productivity. Factor analysis and linear regression served as tools for evaluation.

Our findings imply that the volume of funding is not as influential as supposed. We revealed that age and language (Francophone versus Anglophone) of university instruction, and, in addition, the origin of funding do affect researcher productivity. Generally speaking, young researchers, as well as those affiliated with Anglophone or/and large universities tend to produce more publications. The gender of researcher does not seem to significantly influence the productivity variables.

The results of our analysis should motivate program evaluators who assess the benefits of public funding andintervention to support academic research. It is essential thatevaluators do not only see these benefits in terms of number of publications produced, but also through the prism of publication quality (citations and outcomes generated) as well as individual and organizational attributes. In this way, those designing interventions to support research will benefit from the fully-fledged information necessary to improve program effectiveness.