Academic boredom in practice

Finkielsztein, Mariusz

doi:10.4324/9781003180258-5

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second study, which constitutes the background knowledge utilized in this paper, was carried out by the first author between 2013 and 2018, among researchers and teachers at the University of Warsaw (Finkielsztein, 2021). This investigation’s primary subject was boredom and similar states academics experience during various work-related activities (scientific conferences, teaching, research, and administrative duties).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Todorovsky (2014) notes analyzing his working time budget calculated based on his 45-year academic career, he spent about 52 percent of his work time on bureaucratic tasks, broadly understood, (whereas teaching occupied only 19 percent and research 22 percent). This results in academics becoming ‘scholarly souls trapped in a bureaucrat’s body’ (Graeber, 2015, p. 54), ‘clerk academics’ (Finkielsztein, 2021). Based on systemic mistrust toward academics dressed in formally rational costume, current audit culture results in ‘the regime of tables’ – the imperative for academics to schedule and justify their actions, and then prove that they did it.…”

Section: Bureaucracy and The Sense Of Meaninglessnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The stereotype of the scientist whose work is always charged with meaning is still common in the academic world (Finkielsztein, 2021). This stereotype seems to be adequate for research activities, as these are core tasks and situations in which scientists are thinking about what they see as science, presumably the most significant element of many people’s vocational identities.…”

Section: Two Logics Of Practice: Research and Bureaucracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our material obtained from the ethnographic research suggests that the sense of meaninglessness related to scientists’ work is strongly connected with tasks that are perceived as supplementary, imposed, unwelcome, non-essential for research, and regarded as ‘bureaucratic work’. In other words, due to the intensive socialization in this direction, most scientists have a strong research identity (Finkielsztein, 2021; Wagner, 2011), which results in a hierarchy of activities ranging from those perceived as contradictory to this core identity – instrumental, meaningless, boring, and repellent – to those close to a core identity – substantive, and meaningful (see Figure 1). The former include various bureaucratic duties, reporting, performing administrative functions, grant writing (especially the non-scientific part), and the latter activities encompass conducting research and publishing, reading scientific literature, and reviewing peers’ papers for journals.…”

Section: Two Logics Of Practice: Research and Bureaucracymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To show the incongruence of those competing logics, we analyze the data derived from a mixed-method study conducted between 2013 and 2014 among beneficiaries of an international research grant project. As a supplementary source of reference, we use our research on academic boredom (Finkielsztein, 2021) and laboratory scientists’ work and careers (Wagner, 2011, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The sense of meaninglessness in bureaucratized science

Finkielsztein

Wagner

2022

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Looking at scientists (in the life sciences), we focus on the sense of meaninglessness associated with bureaucratization. We define the sense of meaninglessness as a perception of meaning deficit or meaning conflict in particular situations that can be associated with frustration, irritation, and/or boredom. We show that it can be caused by identity disturbance – particularly the incongruence between the ideal self as a researcher and the imposed self as a bureaucrat. We claim that the sense of meaninglessness is more likely to emerge in those activities that are further from an individual’s core identity, and more identity work is needed to make them meaningful. We also claim that processes of rationalization imposed by external agendas, particularly transitions from substantive to formal rationality (predictability, control and calculability, efficiency) contribute to the proliferation of meaninglessness in academia. The sense of meaninglessness is, therefore, ignited by the external forces colonizing academic life and constitutes an instance of the ‘irrationality of rationality’. It is an outcome or side effect of the collision between two incompatible logics of practice: bureaucratic and scientific. To show the incongruence of those competing logics, we analyze the data derived from a mixed-method study conducted between 2013 and 2014 among beneficiaries of an international research grant project. As a supplementary source of reference, we use our research on academic boredom and laboratory scientists’ work and careers.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Bureaucracy and The Sense Of Meaninglessnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Two Logics Of Practice: Research and Bureaucracymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Two Logics Of Practice: Research and Bureaucracymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The sense of meaninglessness in bureaucratized science

Finkielsztein

Wagner

2022

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Impact of Boredom in Marriage on Marital Satisfaction

Muturi

2023

IJP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of boredom in marriage on marital satisfaction. Methodology: This study adopted a desk methodology. A desk study research design is commonly known as secondary data collection. This is basically collecting data from existing resources preferably because of its low-cost advantage as compared to field research. Our current study looked into already published studies and reports as the data was easily accessed through online journals and libraries. Findings: Boredom in marriage can influence the spouses' behaviors, emotions, and cognitions, such as reducing their positive interactions, increasing their negative interactions, lowering their mood, and impairing their judgment. Boredom in marriage can have negative consequences for the individual and relational well-being of the spouses, such as affecting their physical and mental health, undermining their intimacy and commitment, and increasing their risk of infidelity or divorce. Boredom in marriage can be prevented or reduced by enhancing the quality and quantity of communication, sharing new and meaningful experiences, expressing appreciation and affection, seeking professional help if needed, and maintaining a positive attitude and outlook on the relationship. Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: The Arousal Theory, Cognitive Theory and Psychodynamic Theory may be used to anchor future studies on use of marriage institutions. Marital therapists and counselors could incorporate boredom assessment and intervention strategies in their work with couples who report low marital satisfaction. Policymakers and educators could design and implement programs that promote healthy and satisfying marriages in the society.

show abstract

Academic boredom in practice

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

The sense of meaninglessness in bureaucratized science

The sense of meaninglessness in bureaucratized science

The Impact of Boredom in Marriage on Marital Satisfaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About