ABSTRACT

In this paper, we consider, from critical perspectives, the ways in which research assessment governs the production of academic knowledge and can contribute to epistemic injustices. This issue is examined through a fieldwork study in 2018 of the implications of the Danish Bibliometric Indicator for research in a humanities department of a research-intensive Danish university. We draw on Connell’s Southern Theory in conjunction with Bourdieu’s work on language and power to show how humanities research in the Danish language is pushed onto the periphery of global disciplinary fields. The paper highlights that regimes of governance such as bibliometric research assessment affect not only what is published and where but also what is recognised as scientific or academic language. Such regimes can contribute significantly to the generation and reproduction of epistemic injustices through limitations on how, and by whom, legitimate knowledge is defined, produced and promulgated. We argue that it is time to recognise this as the colonisation of research.

摘要

在本文中，我们从批判的角度考虑了研究评估如何支配学术知识的产生，并可能导致认知上的不公正。这个问题是通过 2018 年的一项实地调查研究来研究的，该研究探讨了丹麦文献计量指标对丹麦一所研究密集型大学人文学科的研究的影响。我们借鉴了康奈尔的南方理论结合 Bourdieu 关于语言和权力的工作，展示丹麦语的人文研究如何被推到全球学科领域的边缘。该论文强调，文献计量研究评估等治理制度不仅会影响发表的内容和发表的地点，还会影响被认为是科学或学术语言的内容。通过限制如何以及由谁来定义、生产和传播合法知识，此类制度可能会极大地促进认知不公正的产生和再生产。我们认为，是时候承认这是研究的殖民化了。