The article presents a theoretical reflection on research evaluation regimes – state-initiatives historically installed in European countries to coordinate the distribution of research funding – and proposes four dimensions enabling their comparison from a global perspective and potentially advancing future research. We take Michael Power’s argument that evaluations are cultural artefacts and essentially linked to modes of governing as a starting point to further the analytical reflection on the modes of governing science through research evaluation regimes and develop a critical heuristic that accounts for so far neglected aspects. Much of the existing scholarship on research evaluation systems adopts a case-based approach shaped by methodological nationalism, thereby neglecting transnational processes, historical and socio-political variation, and the diverse constellations of formal and informal relationships between evaluating and evaluated actors. Based on this critique, we develop a heuristic of four dimensions of research evaluation regimes which can inform future research on transnational dynamics and normative aspects. The article identifies the constellation of actors (1), procedures (2), functions (3), and programmes and values (4) as core dimensions of research evaluation regimes which can advance inquiries into the governing of science through research evaluation from a transnational perspective. The heuristic is presented as a starting point to conduct context-sensitive, comparative studies of research evaluation regimes and their governing of science.

Online education has evolved from being a complementary option to becoming a central pillar in contemporary educational systems. However, its effectiveness depends on the implementation of sound pedagogical strategies. This study presents a systematic literature review following the PRISMA protocol, analyzing articles published between 2018 and 2023 in indexed databases. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 44 empirical and experimental studies were selected. The results reveal three main trends: (1) adaptive platforms enhance individualized learning processes, (2) gamification and collaborative activities are essential for motivation, and (3) flexible self-regulated learning is crucial in higher education. In addition, it was observed that assessment metrics require mixed indicators (performance, participation, satisfaction, and perceived self-efficacy). The evidence suggests that online education demands integrative pedagogical approaches capable of addressing the diverse needs of the digital learner.

The objective of the research was to evaluate the incidence of gamification, implemented through platforms such as Educaplay and Genially, for an adequate reading comprehension in the subject of Language and Literature with basic education students. A quasi-experimental design was used, with pre-post diagnostic tests, as well as surveys and direct classroom observation, analyzing students' motivation and participation. The sample consisted of 60 eighth-grade students, selected through simple random and intentional sampling, respectively, with PROLECSE-SE and CLP being the instruments used to validate the study. As a result, a considerable increase in overall performance was demonstrated, with averages rising from 7.02 to 10.45 out of 15 points, highlighting the inferential and critical levels. It was concluded that gamification is an effective strategy that strengthens reading comprehension, energizes learning, and promotes more interactive and student-centered educational environments.

Abstract Increasing competition in science and higher education has sparked contentious debate and scholarly attention in recent years. Despite their significant merits, prevailing accounts of competition fall short of capturing the competitive dynamics in science and higher education: Most of the time, actors in this sector are involved in not just one but several competitions. Universities as organizations, researchers as individual actors, and also state actors are simultaneously embedded in different, nested, and interdependent competitions, which we refer to as multiple competition. Individual and collective actors engage in heterogeneous—albeit interrelated—forms of competition for scarce symbolic and material goods like attention, reputation, ranking positions, research grants, high-quality publications, personnel, and employment. Furthermore, the multiplicity of competitions that individual academics, universities, and state agencies face might reinforce each other. Using theoretical resources from sociology and economics, we propose a new conceptual framework for analyzing constellations of multiple competition in science and higher education. We demonstrate the added value of this conceptualization for empirical studies by drawing on examples from different academic systems.

Abstract This Introduction to the Special Issue “The Past and Present of Peer Review in the Humanities” situates the currently dominant evaluative regime of peer review within a longer and broader history of scholar-to-scholar evaluation in the humanities. Building on the articles included in this issue, it aims to expand the historical and sociological understanding of “peer review” by exploring a wide range of evaluative practices—from post-publication open book reviews to pre-publication double-blind article assessments—across diverse historical contexts, from nineteenth-century France to twenty-first-century Sweden. The Introduction first offers a new and preliminary long-term historical narrative of the development of peer review in the humanities. Second, it outlines the various and evolving forms and functions of peer review within the field. Finally, it sketches how these historical perspectives and a broader understanding of “peer review” can inform ongoing discussions about the future of peer evaluation in both the humanities and the sciences.

Abstract In this article, we introduce and empirically illustrate a practice-theoretical framework for understanding the relevance of knowledge. We argue that the notion of relevance - while proliferating in the science-policy debates and knowledge management discourses - has remained strikingly under-theorised and not sufficiently sensitive to the diversities of knowledge-producing and -adopting contexts. To alleviate this, we develop an account of relevance that draws on the practice-theoretical approach in social theory and its view of knowledge as essentially embedded in social practices. We propose that the relevance of knowledge relies on making connections between the incoming knowledge and the heterogeneous configuration of elements constituting the knowledge-receiving practice, including pre-existing knowledge, meanings, aspirations, technologies and tools. In our framework, relevance is not an intrinsic or universal characteristic of knowledge but a relational, multidimensional and dynamic outcome of how knowledge becomes externalised and how it aligns with the organisation of a given practice. In the second part of the article, we employ this framework to account for the patterns of adoption of knowledge produced in the so-called User Experience research. We conclude by suggesting that the proposed practice-theoretical understanding may inspire more finely-grained strategies for achieving the relevance of knowledge.

Se realizó una revisión sistemática sobre la contaminación por metales pesados en cangrejosdel género Ucides, siguiendo la guía PRISMA 2020, con el objetivo de evaluar la información existente eidentificar vacíos que guíen a nuevas investigaciones. Se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en cinco basesde datos obteniendo 389 registros. Tras eliminar duplicados y aplicar criterios de inclusión y exclusión,se seleccionaron 19 documentos, complementados con 8 adicionales obtenidos mediante asistentes deinteligencia artificial, conformando un corpus de 27 estudios. Se obtuvo la producción científica porespecie, país, zonas geográficas y temáticas abordadas. Los resultados evidencian una concentracióninvestigativa en Brasil y Ecuador, con predominancia de Ucides cordatus sobre U. occidentalis. Sereportó alto nivel de contaminación en estos cangrejos. Se identificaron vacíos temáticos relevantes enambas especies de Ucides, lo que permite orientar futuras investigaciones hacia enfoques integradoresen ecotoxicología, salud pública y conservación de ecosistemas de manglar.

El presente estudio tuvo como objetivo establecer la asociación entre el estrés y la resiliencia en internos de medicina en entornos hospitalarios. La investigación se realizó con un diseño no experimental, observacional, transversal y analítico, utilizando dos cuestionarios estandarizados. La muestra estuvo conformada por 130 internos de medicina. Los resultados indicaron que la correlación entre el nivel global de estrés y el nivel global de resiliencia en los internos fue positiva, aunque débil y no estadísticamente significativa.

This article examines academic cyberplagiarism as a form of dishonesty among engineering students, integrating historical, theoretical, and practical perspectives. Despite changes in its discursive representation, plagiarism continues to be regarded as both a moral and legal infraction. A non-experimental, quantitative, cross-sectional research design was employed. The study sample consisted of 360 engineering students, along with 200 academic papers reviewed for evidence of cyberplagiarism. The findings reveal that most students engage in practices such as downloading complete papers, copying paragraphs, or removing citations, primarily driven by lack of time and the pursuit of higher grades. The results also indicate a prevailing belief that all online content is freely available for use. Notably, 92\% of the reviewed works lacked proper bibliographies and contained fragments of digital documents.

Abstract Through journal peer review, reviewers play a crucial role in ensuring the quality and integrity of published research. Most of the literature focuses on the challenges facing peer review, while limited research has been conducted on the engagement of academics with peer review and little to none has focused on the engagement of doctoral students. Considering that doctoral studies are pivotal in the training of independent researchers and peer review is a fundamental pillar of academic research, this study, guided by socialization theory, explored the socialization experiences of doctoral students as they engage in or refrain from engaging in peer review activities. To this end, we conducted 51 semi-structured interviews with STEM doctoral students from 11 research-intensive universities in China to investigate whether and how they engage in peer review. The analysis showed that most doctoral students engage in peer review by assisting their supervisors in the peer review process under supervisory mentoring, a process we termed “auxiliary reviewing.” Their participation in auxiliary reviewing is not recognized (by journals), with some students wishing it to be acknowledged and others not showing concern about it; students’ attitudes depend on their views on work valorization. Most students underline the importance of mentoring for reviewing and the key role of supervisors in teaching and guiding them to do high-quality peer reviewing. Some students had been invited directly by journals to act as reviewers, but these students also stressed the role of prior mentor-reviewing experiences in building confidence to undergo the transition to become independent referees. The findings have implications for doctoral education and for the sustainability of peer review.