Do faculty who teach more produce less research? We revisit this question with a better measure of research productivity, eschewing simple publication counts in favor of the impact of research measured by Google citations. Using original data, we pose this question in the broader context of other determinants of scholarly productivity. We find that heavier teaching crowds out research. Furthermore, faculty with more teaching duties tend to protect the quantity of their research more than the quality. We also find that faculty rank, promotion, experience, gender, the ability to win grants, and the ranking of the resident school are significant predictors of faculty research output.
AltonjiJ. G.ElderT. E.TaberC. R. (2005). Selection on observed and unobserved variables: Assessing the effectiveness of catholic schools. Journal of Political Economy, 113(1), 151–184.
2.
AngristJ.PischkeJ.-S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricists companion. Princeton University Press.
3.
AroraA.GambardellaA. (2005). The impact of NSF support for basic research in economics. Annales d’Économie et de Statistique, 79(80), 91–117.
4.
BlackburnR.BehymerC.HallD. (1978). Research note: Correlates of faculty publication. Sociology of Education, 51(2), 132–141.
5.
ChubinD. E.PorterA. L.BoeckmannM. E. (1981). Career patterns of scientists. American Sociological Review (Comments), 46(4), 488–496.
6.
DiamondA. (1986). The life-cycle research productivity of mathematicians and scientists. Journal of Gerontology, 41(4), 520–525.
7.
DundarH.LewisD. R. (1998). Determinants of research productivity in higher education. Research in Higher Education, 39(6), 607–631.
8.
FaiaM. (1976). Teaching and research: Rapport or mesalliance. Research in Higher Education, 4(3), 235–246.
9.
FeldmanK. A. (1987). Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Research in Higher Education, 26(3), 227–298.
10.
FoxK. J.MilbourneR. (1999). What determines output of academic economists?The Economic Record, 75(3), 256–267.
11.
FoxM. F.MohapatraS. (2007). Socio-organizational characteristics of work and publication productivity among academic scientists in doctoral-granting departments. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(5), 542–571.
12.
GoldenJ.CarstensenF. (1992). Academic research productivity, department size and organization: Further results, comment. Economics of Education Review, 11(2), 153–160.
13.
GravesP. E.MarchandJ. R.ThompsonR. (1982). Economics departmental rankings: Research incentives, constraints and efficiency. The American Economic Review, 72(5), 1131–1141.
14.
HallB. H.MairesseJ.TurnerL. (2007). Identifying age, cohort, and period effects in scientific research productivity: Discussion and illustration using simulated and actual data on French physicists. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 16(2), 159–177.
15.
HattieJ.MarshH. W. (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507–542.
16.
HesliV.LeeJ. M. (2011). Faculty research productivity: Why do some of our colleagues publish more than others?Political Science & Politics, 44(2), 393–408.
17.
JacobB.LefgrenL. (2011). The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. Journal of Public Economics, 95(10), 1168–1177.
18.
JordanJ. M.MeadorM.WaltersS. J. K. (1988). Effects of department size and organization on the research productivity of academic economists. Economics Review of Education, 7(2), 251–255.
19.
KyvikS. (1995). Are big university departments better than smaller ones?Higher Education, 30(3), 295–304.
20.
LittleR. (1992). Regression with missing X’s: A review. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 87(420), 1227–1237.
21.
MarshH. W.HattieJ. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic, or independent constructs?The Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–641.
22.
Martín-MartínA.Orduna-MaleaE.ThelwallM.López-CózarE. D. (2018). Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1160–1177.
23.
MaskeK. L.DurdenG. C.GaynorP. E. (2003). Determinants of scholarly productivity among male and female economists. Economic Inquiry, 41(4), 555–564.
24.
MayerS.RathmannJ. (2018). How does research productivity relate to gender? Analyzing gender differences for multiple publication dimensions. Scientometrics, 117(3), 1663–1693.
25.
McPhersonM.SchapiroM. O. (1999). Tenure issues in higher education. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 13(1), 85–98.
OsterE. (2019). Unobservable selection and coefficient stability: Theory and evidence. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 37(2), 187–204.
28.
OsterS. M.HamermeshD. S. (1986). Aging and productivity among economists. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(1), 154–156.
29.
PorterS. R.ToutkoushianR. K. (2006). Institutional research productivity and the connection to average student quality and overall reputation. Economics of Education Review, 25(6), 605–617.
30.
RubinD. (1978). Multiple imputations in sample surveys—A phenomenological Bayesian approach. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, 1, 20–34.
31.
SchaferJ.OlsenM. (1998). Multiple imputation for multivariate missing-data problems: A data analyst’s perspective. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 33(4), 545–571.
32.
SnowballJ. D.ShackletonC. M. (2018). Factors enabling and constraining research in a small, research-intensive South African University. Research Evaluation, 27(2), 119–131.
33.
TienF.BlackburnR. (1996). Faculty rank system, research motivation, and faculty research productivity: Measure refinement and theory testing. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(1), 2–22.
34.
WaymanJ. C. (2003, April). Multiple imputation for missing data: What is it and how can we use it? [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, United States.
35.
XieY.ShaumanK. (1998). Sex differences in research productivity: New evidence about an old puzzle. American Sociological Review, 63(6), 847–870.
