What perspectives underlie ‘researcher identity’? A review of two decades of empirical studies

Abstract

Over the past two decades, identity has emerged as a concept framing studies of early career researcher experience. Yet, identity is an amorphous concept, understood and used in a range of ways. This systematic review aimed to unpack the underpinnings of the notion of researcher identity. The final sample consisted of 38 empirical articles published in peer-reviewed journals in the last 20 years. Analyses focused on (a) identifying the dimensions used to define researcher identity, and (b) characterising the meta-theories—the underlying assumptions of the research—in relation to these dimensions. We identified four different stances towards researcher identity (clusters), based on variation on the identity dimensions in relation to the meta-theories. We characterised these as (1) transitioning among identities, (2) balancing identity continuity and change, (3) personal identity development through time and (4) personal and stable identity. These stances incorporate thought-provoking nuances and complex conceptualisations of the notion of researcher identity, for instance, that meta-theory was insufficient to characterise researcher identity stance. The contribution of the study is first to be able to differentiate four characterizations of researcher identity—important given that many studies had not clearly expressed a stance. The second is the potential of the four dimensions to help characterise identity, in past as well as future research—thus a useful tool for those working in this area. Many questions remain, but perhaps the biggest is to what extent and under what conditions is identity a productive notion for understanding early career researcher experience?

“Teaching, my passion; publishing, my pain”: unpacking academics’ professional identity tensions through the lens of emotional resilience

“…In tune with post-modernist standpoints (Henkel 2005;Castelló et al 2021), we are aware of the dynamics and changes of academic identities. As academics face continuous changes and constantly interact with the sociocultural contexts, the negotiation among their multiple sub-identities is an on-going process (Billot 2010;Trautwein 2018).…”

Navigating the neo-academy: Experiences of liminality and identity construction among early career researchers at one Australian regional university

“…An emergence of research into the experiences of ECRs has ensued (Castelló et al, 2020), given concerns over the potential impact of neoliberal institutional cultures. Shahjahan (2020, p. 787) argues that neoliberal moves have created a "precarity norm" where temporal constraints coupled with intensified expectations leave ECRs fearing they will fail to reach an academic bar metricised in outputs.…”

“…Early career researchers (ECRs) are most typically defined within the literature as those within 5 years of their PhD conferral (Australian Research Council [ARC], 2020). Despite their novitiate status, ECRs in the employ of university contexts are required to meet amplified research expectations alongside their more experienced colleagues, while concurrently navigating the complexities of academic life that often includes substantial teaching workloads, building research capacities (Zipin & Nuttall, 2016) and importantly, continuing the journey of researcher identity development (Castelló et al, 2020). Regional university settings, and particular disciplines such as education, have been identified as conspicuous sites of rapidly escalated research performance expectations in a bid to remain competitive (Rogers & Swain, 2021).…”

Building research capacity through an academic community of practice: a design case study

“…They did not mention the needs as a shared element. To complement the CoP framework, the authors scrutinized the literature on the researcher's identity (Castelló et al , 2021; James and Lokhtina, 2018; Jawitz, 2009); researchers' motivation (Hardré et al , 2011; Trujillo, 2007) and professional development needs (Behar-Horenstein et al , 2014). The community psychologists' works were especially detrimental in operationalizing researchers' psychological and social needs and behaviors: a sense of community (SoC), belonging, connectedness, collegiality, altruism and psychological needs fulfillment.…”