Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Publishing is a critical avenue for scholars and a significant challenge for Chinese doctoral students. This study employs online ethnography to examine discussions on academic publishing anomie in the ‘Graduated Group’, including interviews with 10 doctoral students to explore the dynamics of academic misconduct. Under the high-pressure environment of ‘publish or perish’, the aspiration of ‘academia as a career’ is being replaced by the means of ‘publishing as a profession’. As the tension between the growing demand for academic publications and the limited availability of journal space intensifies, doctoral students resort to riskier publishing strategies. Utilizing Merton’s anomie theory, this study identifies three types of academic misconduct: innovative, rebellious, and ritualistic. These behaviors, which deviate from the original intent of evaluation systems, reflect students’ helplessness under performance metrics and their rational risk assessment, highlighting the need to address these challenges to protect the academic ecosystem.
Chaojin Wu (Tue,) studied this question.