An overlooked key to excellence in research: a longitudinal cohort study on the association between the psycho-social work environment and research performance

References

• Acock, A. C. 2013. Discovering Structural Equation Modeling Using Stata. College Station: Stata Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bass, B. M., and P. Steidlmeier. 1999. “Ethics, Character, and Authentic Transformational Leadership Behavior.” The Leadership Quarterly 10 (2): 181–217. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(99)00016-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bergstrom, G., C. Bjorklund, I. Fried, J. Lisspers, L. Nathell, U. Hermansson, A. Helander, L. Bodin, and I. B. Jensen. 2008. “A Comprehensive Workplace Intervention and its Outcome with Regard to Lifestyle, Health and Sick Leave: The AHA Study.” Work 31 (2): 167–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bjorkqvist, K., K. Osterman, and M. Hjeltback. 1994. “Aggression among University Employees.” Aggressive Behavior 20 (3): 173–84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:3&lt;173::Aid-Ab2480200304>3.0.Co;2-D. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2337(1994)20:3<173::AID-AB2480200304>3.0.CO;2-D
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bol, T., M. de Vaan, and A. van de Rijt. 2018. “The Matthew Effect in Science Funding.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 115 (19): 4887–90. doi: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719557115
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bornmann, L., and R. Mutz. 2015. “Growth Rates of Modern Science: A Bibliometric Analysis Based on the Number of Publications and Cited References.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 66 (11): 2215–22. doi:https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, B. R. 1987. The Academic Profession. National, Disciplinary, and Institutional Settings. 1987. BerkeIcy, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, M., A. Kenny, and A. Loxley. 2015. Creating a Supportive Working Environment for Academics in Higher Education. Countyr Report Ireland. Dublin: The Irish federation of university teachers.
   Google Scholar
• Cronin, B., and C. R. Sugimoto. 2014. Beyond Bibliometrics: Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dallner, M., A. Elo, F. Gamberale, V. Hottinen, S. Knardahl, K. Lindström, A. Skogstad, and E. Orhede. 2000. Validation of the General Nordic Questionnaire(QPSNordic) for Psychological and Social Factors at Work. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers.
   Google Scholar
• Fila, M. J. 2016. “The job Demands, Control, Support Model: Where are we now?” TKM International Journal for Research in Management 1/1: 15–44.
   Google Scholar
• Foldspang, Lars, Michael Mark, Laurits Rømer Hjorth, Christian Langholz-Carstensen, Otto Melchior Poulsen, Ulf Johansson, Guy Ahonen, Steinar Aasnæss, and Louise Lund Rants. 2014. Working Environment and Productivity: A Register-Based Analysis of Nordic Enterprises. Copenhagen, Denmark: Nordic Council of Ministers.
   Google Scholar
• Heijstra, T., F. S. Steinthorsdóttir, and T. Einarsdóttir. 2017. “Academic Career Making and the Double-Edged Role of Academic Housework.” Gender and Education 29 (6): 764–80. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1171825
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurley, J. 1997. Organisations and Scientific Discovery. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, I. B., C. Björklund, E. Aboagye, J. Hagberg, and L. Bodin. 2018. Arbetsmiljö och produktivitet inom akademin. En studie om den psykosociala arbetsmiljöns betydelse för forskares prestation. (eng: Working environment and productivity in academia. A study on the importance of the psychosocial work environment for researchers ‘performance. Unit of intervention and implementation research. Kaolinska institute.
   Google Scholar
• Karasek, Robert, and Töres Theorell. 1990. Healthy Work. New York, USA: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen, P. O., and M. von Ins. 2010. “The Rate of Growth in Scientific Publication and the Decline in Coverage Provided by Science Citation Index.” Scientometrics 84 (3): 575–603. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-010-0202-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, G. 2006. “The Developmental Leadership Questionnaire (DLQ): Some Psychometric Properties.” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 47 (4): 253–62. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00515.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohela-Karlsson, M., L. Nybergh, and I. Jensen. 2018. “Perceived Health and Work-Environment Related Problems and Associated Subjective Production Loss in an Academic Population.” BMC Public Health 18 (257).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lohela Karlsson, M., G. Bergström, C. Björklund, J. Hagberg, and I. Jensen. 2013. “Production Loss due to ill-Health and Work Environment Problems – Construct Validity and Implications.” JOEM 55 (12): 1475–83.
   Google Scholar
• MacFarlane, B., and D. Burg. 2019. “Women Professors and the Academic Housework Trap.” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 41 (3): 262–74. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2019.1589682
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merton, R. K. 1988. “The Matthew Effect in Science 2. Cumulative Advantage and the Symbolism of Intellectual Property.” Isis 79 (299): 606–23. doi: https://doi.org/10.1086/354848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moed, H. F. 2005. Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Moed, H. F., R. E. De Bruin, and T. N. Van Leeuwen. 1995. “New Bibliometric Tools for the Assessment of National Research Performance – Database Description, Overview of Indicators and First Applications.” Scientometrics 33 (3): 411. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017338
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NIH. 2016. “Citations Per Dollar as a Measure of Productivity.” https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2016/04/28/citations-per-dollar/.
   Google Scholar
• Perc, M. 2014. “The Matthew Effect in Empirical Data.” Journal of The Royal Society Interface 11 (98): 20140378. doi:https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.0378.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rinia, E. J., T. N. van Leeuwen, H. G. van Vuren, and A. F. J. van Raan. 1998. “Comparative Analysis of a set of Bibliometric Indicators and Central Peer Review Criteria: Evaluation of Condensed Matter Physics in the Netherlands.” Research Policy 27 (1): 95–107. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00026-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryan, James C, and John Hurley. 2007. “An Empirical Examination of the Relationship Between Scientists’ Work Environment and Research Performance.” R&D Management 37 (4): 345–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandstrom, U., and P. Van den Besselaar. 2018. “Funding, Evaluation, and the Performance of National Research Systems.” Journal of Informetrics 12 (1): 365–84. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.01.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schreiber, J. B., A. Nora, F. K. Stage, E. A. Barlow, and J. King. 2006. “Reporting Structural Equation Modeling and Confirmatory Factor Analysis Results: A Review.” The Journal of Educational Research 99 (6): 323–38. doi: https://doi.org/10.3200/Joer.99.6.323-338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tangen, S. 2005. “Demystifying Productivity and Performance.” International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 54 (1): 34–46. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400510571437.
   Google Scholar
• Techler, U., and E. A. Hohle. 2013. The Work Situation of the Academic Profession in Europe: Findings of a Survey in Twelve Countries. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Van, R., and F. J. Anthony. 2006. “Statistical Properties of Bibliometric Indicators: Research Group Indicator Distributions and Correlations.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (3): 408–30. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20284
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenner-Gren International Series. 2014. Bibliometrics: Use and Abuse in the Review of Research Performance. Stockholm: Wennergren Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Widenberg, L. 2003. “Psychosocial Research Environment and Scientific Productivity. Gothenburg: Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg.
   Google Scholar