Bridging the Divide: Unveiling Global Disparities and Local Challenges in Academic Internationalization for a Holistic Approach to Change [védés előtt]

Kivonat, rövid leírás

Throughout the article-based dissertation1,2,3,4, I examine contemporary academia, critiquing both the non-transparent domestic academic assessment practices hindering integration into the international research community and the perpetuating global disparities in knowledge production processes. Despite often appearing contradictory in domestic scholarly discourse, these critical viewpoints are interrelated. Addressing both internal regional deficiencies and structural power issues within academia is essential for effecting real change. The development of concrete reform proposals hinges on the visibility of these issues. Therefore, scholars must diligently bring disparities and challenges to light through rigorous research and critical analysis. Combining both bottom-up and top-down perspectives, the dissertation advocates for the centrality of transparency and accountability in academic practices. The dissertation presents a multifaceted analysis of academic assessment practices, geopolitical biases, and gender disparities in scholarly impact, offering a series of critical contributions: Comparative Analysis of Domestic Academic Assessment Processes: The dissertation critiques domestic academic assessment practices, contrasting them with Spain's ANECA and Poland's IDUB, highlighting how non-transparent processes impede international integration and career predictability. Article 1 (Chapter 1.1) emphasizes the need for reform to align with international standards, enhancing global visibility of local institutions. Interconnected Critique of Global and Domestic Academic Systems: The dissertation argues that addressing global academic inequalities and advocating for domestic reforms are complementary. Article 1 (Chapter 1.1) proposes balanced reforms to improve both domestic assessment practices and global academic integration. Geopolitical Biases in Scholarly Impact: The dissertation examines how geographic location affects scholarly impact, particularly in communication studies, revealing disparities in citation metrics and US dominance. Article 3 (Chapter 2.1) integrates critical sociological frameworks and altmetrics to offer a less biased view of scholarly impact, emphasizing inclusive citation practices. Database Discrepancies: Article 2 (Chapter 1.2) analyzes the publication and citation indices of 365 Hungarian social scientists across MTMT, Scopus, and Google Scholar, highlighting the underrepresentation of Hungarian research in international academia. Gender Inequalities in Scholarly Impact: The dissertation identifies gender imbalances in scholarly productivity, particularly in health policy. Article 4 (Chapter 2.2) examines citation patterns to reveal disparities between male and female scholars, advocating for gender-sensitive evaluation criteria and citational justice. De-Westernization of CMS: The dissertation contributes to the de-Westernization discussion in communication research, highlighting the dominance of US-based scholarship and advocating for practices that elevate non-Western contributions. Novel Altmetrics as Methodological Innovations: Introducing novel altmetrics (Scopus view counts) alongside traditional citation metrics, the dissertation expands critical scientometrics' toolkit. Policy and Practice Implications for Enhancing Research Visibility: The dissertation offers strategic policy recommendations to enhance the international visibility and competitiveness of Central and Eastern European research. Article 2 (Chapter 1.2) provides empirical insights into Hungarian social scientists' publication patterns, calling for standardized global databases and transparent academic evaluation systems to address systemic challenges.