The prosocial characteristics and scientific production of professors from the Facultad de Filosofía y Letras from the Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua
Published 2020-12-20
Keywords
- Psychological aspects,
- personality,
- professors,
- scientific publications
- Aspectos psicológicos,
- personalidad,
- profesores,
- publicaciones científicas
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2020
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Abstract
This article summarizes the results of a quantitative and correlational research that sought to relate diverse prosocial behavior traits with the scientific production of a sample of 31 professors with a doctoral degree from the Facultad de Filosofía y Letras at the Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua. A survey of 73 items that uses a five-point Likert-type scale to rate each one was employed, classifying them in six dimensions of prosocial characteristics: a) intrinsic motivation, b) extrinsic motivation, c) self-esteem, d) empathy, e) self-regulation, and f) prosocial behavior. The data was analyzed by considering sociodemographic characteristics, professional profiles, the diverse scientific products accredited by the professors and the six prosocial dimensions. Among the most relevant results, it was found that: i) the doctors with the largest global production qualified lower in the six prosocial dimensions; ii) the younger researchers have published the largest number of articles and obtained the best scores in the prosocial characteristics; iii) the researchers with the largest global production qualified slightly higher in intrinsic motivation; iv) those who obtained their doctoral degree outside of Mexico concentrate more than half of the production and six of them are SNI members, and v) SNI members also concentrate more than half of the production.
References
- Aristegui Noticias (2019). Recortes a Conacyt pueden colapsar centros de investigación en México: investigadores. Recuperado de: https://aristeguinoticias.com/2205/mexico/recortes-a-conacyt-pueden-colapsar-centros-de-investigacion-en-mexico-investigadores.
- Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Nueva York, EEUU: W. H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.
- Caballo, V., y Salazar, I. (2018). La autoestima y su relación con la ansiedad social y las habilidades sociales. Psicología Conductual, 26(1), 23-53. Recuperado de: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6378325.
- Caprara, G., Steca, P., Zelli, A., y Capanna, C. (2005). A new scale for measuring adults’ prosocialness. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21(2), 77-89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.21.2.77.
- Cardelle-Elawar, M., y Sanz, M. (2010). Looking at teacher identity through self-regulation. Psicothema, 22(2), 293-298. Recuperado de: http://www.psicothema.com/PDF/3729.pdf.
- De Mézerville, G. (2004). Ejes de salud mental: los procesos de autoestima, dar y recibir afecto y adaptación al estrés. Trillas.
- Guglielmi, G. (2019). Mexican science suffers under debilitating budget cuts. Nature, 572, 294-295. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-02332-x.
- Inzunza, A. (2017). Conversando con Luis Arturo Godínez: el SNI ha propiciado cambios institucionales y culturales. Revista Forum: Noticias del Foro Consultivo Científico y Tecnológico, (31), 8-17. Recuperado de: https://www.foroconsultivo.org.mx/forum/2017_diciembre/mobile/index.html.
- Ladd, J., Lappé, M., McCormick, J., Boyce, A., y Cho, M. (2009). The ‘how’ and ‘whys’ of research: Life scientists’ views of accountability. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35(12), 762-767. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2009.031781.
- Landini, F. (2015). Contributions of community psychology to rural advisory services: An analysis of Latin American rural extensionists’ point of view. American Journal of Community Psychology, 55(3), 359-368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-015-9712-4.
- Landini, F., Olivera, A., y De Hegedüs, P. (2017). Psychology’s contributions to extension: State of the art and calls to action. Journal of Extension, 55(4), 1-6. Recuperado de: https://joe.org/joe/2017august/pdf/JOE_v55_4comm2.pdf.
- Martínez, N. (2018). Más producción científica, urgen a universidades. En Consorcio Nacional de Recursos de Información Científica y Tecnológico (Conricyt). Noticias y avisos. Recuperado de: http://conricyt.mx/noticias-y-avisos/mas-produccion-cientifica-urgen-a-universidades.htm.
- Mattedi, M., y Spiess, M. (2017). A avaliação da produtividade científica. História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos, 24(3), 623-643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-59702017000300005.
- Mulligan, A., y Mabe, M. (2011). The effect of the internet on researcher motivations, behaviour and attitudes. Journal of Documentation, 67(2), 290-311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111109485.
- Öcshner, A. (2013). Introduction to scientific publishing: Backgrounds, concepts, strategies. Heidelberg, Alemania: Springer.
- Offutt, J. (2011). Editorial: What is the purpose of publishing? Software: Testing, Verification and Reliability, 21(4), 265-266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/stvr.468.
- Patterson-Hazley, M., y Kiewra, K. (2013). Conversations with four highly productive educational psychologists: Patricia Alexander, Richard Mayer, Dale Schunk, and Barry Zimmerman. Educational Psychology Review, 25(1), 19-45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9214-y.
- Reyes, M., y Perales, M. (2016). Research self-efficacy sources and research motivation in a foreign language university faculty in Mexico: Implications for educational policy. Higher Education Research and Development, 35(4), 800-814. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1137884.
- Rodríguez, C. (2016). El Sistema Nacional de Investigadores en números. México: Foro Consultivo Científico y Tecnológico. Recuperado de: http://www.foroconsultivo.org.mx/libros_editados/SNI_en_numeros.pdf.
- Ryan, R., y Deci, E. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.
- Sánchez, V. (2017). Crece 23 por ciento la producción científica en México. En Conacyt Agencia Informativa. Política científica. Recuperado de: http://www.conacytprensa.mx/index.php/sociedad/politica-cientifica/18011-crece-23-por-ciento-produccion-cientifica-mexico.
- Schultz, K., Jones-Walker, C., y Chikkatur, A. (2008). Listening to students, negotiating beliefs: Preparing teachers for urban classrooms. Curriculum Inquiry, 38(2), 155-187. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873X.2007.00404.x.
- Siciliano, M., Welch, E., y Feeney, M. (2018). Network exploration and exploitation: Professional network churn and scientific production. Social Networks, 52, 167-179. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2017.07.003.
- Swan, A., y Brown, S. (2005). Open access self-archiving: An author study. Truro, Reino Unido: Key Perspectives. Recuperado de: http://cogprints.org/4385/1/jisc2.pdf.
- Visdómine-Lozano, C., y Luciano, C. (2006). Locus de control y autorregulación conductual: revisiones conceptual y experimental. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 6(3), 729-751. Recuperado de: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2110683.
- Wigfield, A. (2002). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network, 6(1), 68-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.