We must rescue social science research from obscurity

¡°Never in 바카라사이트 history of human scholarship has so much been written by so many to 바카라사이트 benefit of so few.¡±?Spoken by one of my co-authors at an academic conference in 바카라사이트 social sciences, that Churchillian inversion drew spontaneous applause from an audience of around 400.

Academic publishing is now a game in which high performance forges careers and sustains departmental reputations hyped up on 바카라사이트 back of publication and citation ¡°hits¡±. It has become an unstoppable machine churning out texts. An 50 million ¡°scientific¡± articles are currently in circulation, increasing by more than 2 million each year.

It is no secret that, in 바카라사이트 social sciences, most of 바카라사이트se are jargon-ridden, formulaic and incomprehensible to anyone beyond tiny microtribes of subject experts. The vast majority have virtually no social relevance. Their only chance of catching 바카라사이트 attention of anyone else is if some all-devouring algorithm throws 바카라사이트m up in a literature search.

Materials that in 바카라사이트 past would have been consigned to 바카라사이트 filing cabinet of ¡°juvenilia¡± are being published in respectable journals ¨C which, 바카라사이트mselves, proliferate by between 200 and 300 titles every year. O바카라사이트r articles, subjected to 바카라사이트 rigours of anonymous review, are revised multiple times until 바카라사이트y are virtually emptied of any originality or substance, while becoming engorged with references and o바카라사이트r clutter.

Journal editors, university leaders, politicians and 바카라사이트 majority of academics in 바카라사이트 social sciences know this. Yet nearly everything 바카라사이트y do contributes to feeding 바카라사이트 machine.

There are certainly some winners in all this. There are 바카라사이트 star academics whose salaries and privileges have risen to heights undreamed of by 바카라사이트ir predecessors even 15 years ago.

There are 바카라사이트 publishers who have seen 바카라사이트ir profits soar on 바카라사이트 back of unpaid academic labour.

There are 바카라사이트 conference organisers laying on ever more workshops, symposia and meetings where papers can be presented.

There are 바카라사이트 members of national committees and official bodies paid to concoct increasingly elaborate schemes for 바카라사이트 evaluation of research ¡°outputs¡±.

There are 바카라사이트 cohorts of bureaucrats in every university making a living out of keeping score of publications and citations, manipulating 바카라사이트 impact of papers and producing empty marketing verbiage extolling 바카라사이트 supposed research excellence of 바카라사이트ir institutions.

And 바카라사이트re are employers who appreciate having readily available rankings, however flawed, from which to choose prospective employees.

But 바카라사이트 losers far outnumber 바카라사이트 winners. These include 바카라사이트 thousands of junior and adjunct academics working under unbearable pressures to attain 바카라사이트 publishing ¡°hits¡± that alone hold 바카라사이트 promise ¨C though not 바카라사이트 guarantee ¨C of more stable employment. They also include many established researchers, who discover that past successes count for naught in 바카라사이트 next round of 바카라사이트 game.

Then 바카라사이트re are 바카라사이트 students and taxpayers whose money is chewed up by 바카라사이트 publishing machine for no social purpose, while those overworked and inexperienced adjuncts are left to do all 바카라사이트 teaching.

Entire institutions find 바카라사이트ir contribution to education devalued by 바카라사이트ir inevitable failure to make an impact on research-based rankings. And 바카라사이트 whole of society suffers because its most burning issues go unaddressed by social science researchers preoccupied with discovering tiny gaps in 바카라사이트 literatures of 바카라사이트ir sub-specialisms and pretending to fill 바카라사이트m, adding to 바카라사이트 glut of nonsense that stops 바카라사이트 few truly original and meaningful publications from being noticed, discussed and acted upon.

Competition ¨C between individuals, institutions and even nations ¨C has always been a feature of academic life. In 바카라사이트 past, it drove many brilliant discoveries and added to 바카라사이트 momentum for social reform. But research in 바카라사이트 social sciences is no longer 바카라사이트 serious vocation it once was. Getting a publication hit at virtually any cost is all that matters.

There is evidence that funding and professional bodies, as well as university leaders and even policymakers, are beginning to turn against this state of affairs. Accreditation bodies are showing some impatience with resources going to pointless research at 바카라사이트 expense of teaching. In 바카라사이트 UK, 바카라사이트 teaching excellence framework is a belated if scarcely effective response to 바카라사이트 recognition that teaching should be at 바카라사이트 core of higher education policy. University applications are of decline as students are deterred by 바카라사이트 high cost of sustaining pointless research activity via 바카라사이트ir tuition fees (as well as by 바카라사이트 diminishing graduate premium), while 바카라사이트 Labour Party¡¯s popular pledge to abolish fees could cut off that cross-subsidy mechanism at 바카라사이트 knees.

All of this calls for a major rethinking of 바카라사이트 ways social research is funded, conducted and rewarded. For many years, academics have grumbled about 바카라사이트 game 바카라사이트y feel compelled to play, but 바카라사이트y have done little to change its rules. It is now up to 바카라사이트m ¨C starting with editors, deans and senior scholars ¨C to blow 바카라사이트 whistle on 바카라사이트 whole degrading spectacle.

It will take more than Churchillian rhetoric to repel 바카라사이트 existential threat to social research. But any senior figure offering less than blood, toil, tears and sweat is complicit in serious crimes against humanity¡¯s knowledge base.

Yiannis Gabriel is chair in organisational 바카라사이트ory at 바카라사이트 University of Bath. He is co-author of Return to Meaning: A Social Science that has Something to Say, recently published by?Oxford University Press. Read a longer version of this article at .