U progu akademii. Wyzwania na drodze do doktoratu i kariery naukowej w naukach społecznych (i nie tylko)

Spis treści:

Wprowadzenie

Kim jest młody naukowiec?
Mapa książki
Jak dojrzewał pomysł na książkę
   Między badaniami a praktyką peer-mentoringową
   Między doktoratem a współpracą dydaktyczną

Część I. WYZWANIA ZWIĄZANE Z KSZTAŁCENIEM I ROZWOJEM

Rozdział 1. Edukacja

System szkolnictwa wyższego w Polsce
Okres studiów magisterskich
   Praca magisterska jako miniatura pracy naukowej
Droga do doktoratu
   Czym jest doktorat?
   Wymagania stawiane doktorantom
   Szkoła doktorska i proces kształcenia
   Wybór szkoły doktorskiej i rekrutacja
   Indywidualny plan badawczy
   Ocena śródokresowa
Inne możliwości zdobycia doktoratu
   Możliwości kształcenia za granicą
   Doktorat za granicą w ujęciu statystycznym
   Uwarunkowania mobilności
Finalizacja doktoratu

Rozdział 2. Potencjał do pracy naukowej i psychologiczny profil naukowców

Od potencjału do osiągnięć
Predyspozycje, zdolności, inteligencja
Potencjał mierzony na różne sposoby
Co jeszcze wiemy o osobowości naukowców?
Twórczy obraz siebie
W kalejdoskopie motywów
   Rodzaje motywacji
   Hubris
   Gdy motywacja hubrystyczna łączy się z narcyzmem
Ciemna strona mocy

Rozdział 3. Kompetencje badawcze i dydaktyczne

Nabywanie kompetencji
Syndrom oszusta
Kompetencje badawcze
   Kompetencje badawcze widziane przez pryzmat wymagań rynku pracy
Kompetencje dydaktyczne
   Co robią nauczyciele akademiccy?
   Gdy doktorant staje się nauczycielem
   Praktyka dydaktyczna
Nie tylko dydaktyka, czyli kilka słów o pracy organizacyjnej
   Gdy badacz staje się kierownikiem
Perspektywy zatrudnienia
   Zatrudnienie w świetle statystyk

Część II. GŁÓWNE WYZWANIA DZIAŁALNOŚCI NAUKOWEJ

Rozdział 4. Praktyka z lotu ptaka

Naukowcy pracują dużo, czyli ile?
Jak wygląda typowy plan dnia?

Rozdział 5. Działalność badawcza

Poznanie naukowe
Praca badawcza i jej etapy
Nowe standardy w nauce

Rozdział 6. Projekty i granty

Dlaczego naukowcy starają się o granty?
Ubieganie się o grant
   Wstępny rekonesans
Czasochłonność przygotowywania wniosku
   Trudność w otrzymaniu grantu
Proces recenzji grantów
   Ocena projektów jako przedmiot badań
   Niezgodność ocen eksperckich
   Fundusze w rękach elity
Własny grant na początku kariery
   Znaczenie grantów na wczesnych etapach kariery
   Powiązanie grantu z publikacjami
Liczy się proces

Rozdział 7. Publikowanie

Rodzaje publikacji naukowych
   Monografia naukowa
   Artykuły naukowe
   Rodzaje artykułów naukowych
Proces publikacji
   Język publikacji
   Wybór czasopisma
   Drapieżne czasopisma
   Proces recenzji
   Kryteria oceny recenzji
   Decyzje recenzentów
   Czas trwania procesu publikacji
   Rewizja
   Ostatnia prosta

Rozdział 8. Tekst w świecie cyfr

Listy ministerialne i nie tylko
Publish or perish (publikuj albo zgiń)
Produktywność mierzona liczbą publikacji
Liczba autorów i powody współautorstwa
Wskaźniki bibliometryczne
   Wskaźniki cytowań
   Indeks Hirscha
   Wskaźnik wpływu
Od braku publikacji do produktywności
Wskaźniki na wczesnych etapach kariery u wybitnie uzdolnionych
Orientacje wobec pracy naukowej

Rozdział 9. Konferencje naukowe

Organizacja konferencji oraz formy konferencji
   Program
   Konferencje w świecie wirtualnym
Bierny udział w konferencjach
Aktywny udział
   Abstrakt konferencyjny
   Plakat konferencyjny
   Plakaty jako przedmiot badań
   Prezentacja posteru naukowego
   Wybór między posterem a referatem – kilka nieoczywistych kwestii
   Różnice międzypłciowe
   Referat
      Treści na slajdzie a wypowiedzi prezentera
      Dyskusja ze słuchaczami
Wczesna inicjacja konferencyjna
   Znaczenie wczesnej praktyki konferencyjnej
   Społeczny wymiar konferencji
Trema w roli głównej

Część III. PSYCHOSPOŁECZNY KONTEKST WCZESNYCH ETAPÓW KARIERY NAUKOWEJ

Rozdział 10. Ważni inni

Wybór opiekuna naukowego
   Strategia „od promotora do tematu”
   Strategia „od tematu do promotora”
Na co zwracają uwagę promotorzy w wyborze doktoranta?
Promotor idealny – dwie perspektywy
   Efektywna współpraca – głos ma druga strona
   Wszyscy się uczymy
Ciemne strony relacji – niebezpieczeństwa i nadużycia

Rozdział 11. Współpraca i rywalizacja

Praca zespołowa
   Praca zespołowa pod lupą nauki
Środowisko na miarę własnych potrzeb
Rywalizacja

Rozdział 12. Wyzwania psychologiczne i zdrowotne związane z pracą

Dobrostan i zdrowie
Paradoksy
Czynniki ochronne
   Rozwiązania systemowe

Rozdział 13. Wyzwania związane z płcią

Kobiety w nauce
   Z poziomu statystyk
   Sytuacja kobiet w akademii
Posiadanie rodziny
   Matka – żona – doktorantka
   Konflikt ról
   Facylitacja
Poszukiwanie rozwiązań

Podsumowanie
Bibliografia
Wykaz rysunków, tabel, wypowiedzi
Noty o autorkach

Literatura cytowana
Aagaard, K., Kladakis, A., Nielsen, M.W. (2020). Concentration or dispersal of re-
search funding? Quantitative Science Studies, 1(1), 117–149. https://doi.org/10.1162/qs-
s_a_00002
Abbott, A., Cyranoski, D., Jones, N., Maher, B., Schiermeier, Q., Van Noorden, R. (2010). Me-
trics: Do metrics matter? Nature, 465(7300), 860–862. https://doi.org/10.1038/465860a
Abdoul, H., Perrey, C., Amiel, P., Tubach, F., Gottot, S., Durand-Zaleski, I., Alberti, C.
(2012). Peer review of grant applications: Criteria used and qualitative study of reviewer
practices. PLoS ONE, 7(9), e46054. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0046054
Abouserie, R. (1996). Stress, coping strategies and job satisfaction in university academic
staff. Educational Psychology, 16(1), 49–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341960160104
Agarwal, R., Chertow, G.M., Mehta, R.L. (2006). Strategies for successful patient oriented
research: Why did I (not) get funded? Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephro-
logy, 1(2), 340–343. https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.00130605
Aguinis, H., Dalton, D.R., Bosco, F.A., Pierce, C.A., Dalton, C.M. (2011). Meta-analytic
choices and judgment calls: Implications for theory building and testing, obtained
effect sizes, and scholarly impact. Journal of Management, 37(1), 5–38. https://doi.org/
10.1177/0149206310377113
Ali, A., Kohun, F. (2006). Dealing with isolation feelings in IS doctoral programs. Interna-
tional Journal of Doctoral Studies, 1, 21–33. https://doi.org/10.28945/58
Amabile, T.M. (1996). Creativity in context. Westview Press, Inc.
Ampaw,  F.D.,  Jaeger,  A.J.  (2011).  Completing  the  three  stages  of  doctoral  education:
An event history analysis. Research in Higher Education, 53(6), 640–660. http://doi.
org/10.1007/s11162-011-9250-3
Anderson, M.S., Swazey, J.P. (1998). Reflections on the graduate student experience: An
overview. W: M.S. Anderson (red.), The experience of being in graduate school (s. 3–27).
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Antes, A.L., Mart, A., DuBois, J.M. (2016). Are leadership and management essential for
good research? An interview study of genetic researchers. Journal of Empirical Rresearch
on Human Research Ethics, 11(5), 408–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/1556264616668775195 Bibliografia
Ateş, G., Höllander, K., Koltcheva, N., Kirstc, S., Parada, F. (2011). EURODOC Survey
I: The first Eurodoc Survey on doctoral candidates in twelve European countries – Descrip -
tive Report. Eurodoc. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/216304147_EURO-
DOC_Survey_I_The_first_Eurodoc_Survey_on_doctoral_candidates_in_twelve_
European_countries_-_Descriptive_Report.
Atzmueller,  M.,  Doerfel,  S.,  Hotho,  A.,  Mitzlaff,  F.,  Stumme,  G.  (2011).  Face-to-fa-
ce contacts at a conference: Dynamics of communities and roles. W: M. Atzmuel-
ler, A. Chin, D. Helic, A. Hotho (red.), Modeling and mining ubiquitous social media  
(s. 21–39). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Atzmueller, M., Ernst, A., Krebs, F., Scholz, C., Stumme, G. (2014). On the evolution of
social groups during coffee breaks. W: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on
World Wide Web, 631–636. https://doi.org/10.1145/2567948.2579234
Avveduto, S. (2001). International mobility of PhDs. W: OCDE proceedings, Innovative pe-
ople: Mobility of skilled personnel in national innovation system (s. 229–242).
Babiak, P., Neumann, C.S., & Hare, R.D. (2010). Corporate psychopathy: Talking the
walk. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 28, 174–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.925
Baker, V.L., Pifer, M.J. (2011). The role of relationships in the transition from doctoral
student to independent scholar. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(1), 5–17. https://
doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2010.515569
Beall, J. (2010). Predatory’ open-access publishers. The Charleston Advisor, 11(4), 10–17.
Bell, E., King, D. (2010). The elephant in the room: Critical management studies confe-
rences as a site of body pedagogics. Management Learning, 41(4), 429–442. http://doi.
org/10.1177/1350507609348851
Berg, J., Hicks, R. (2017). Successful design and delivery of a professional poster. Journal of the
American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 29(8), 461–469. https://doi.org/10.1002/2327-
6924.12478
Björk, B.C. (2019). Acceptance rates of scholarly peer-reviewed journals: A literature survey.
El Profesional de La Información, 28(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2019.jul.07
Björk, B.C., Solomon, D. (2013). The publishing delay in scholarly peer-reviewed jour-
nals. Journal of Informetrics, 7(4), 914–923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2013.09.001
Blackburn, J. L., Hakel, M. D. (2006). An examination of sources of peer-review bias. Psy-
chological Science, 17(5), 378–382. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01715.x
Bloch, C., Sorensen, M.P. (2015). The size of research funding: Trends and implications.
Science and Public Policy, 42(1), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scu019
Bogart,  L.M.,  Benotsch,  E.G.,  &  Pavlovic,  J.P.  (2004).  Feeling  superior  but  threatened:  
The relation of narcissism to social comparison. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 26,
35–44. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2601_4
Bøgelund, P. (2015). How supervisors perceive PhD supervision – And how they practice
it. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 10, 39–55. https://doi.org/10.28945/2096
Bohannon, J. (2013). Who’s afraid of peer review? Science, 342(6154), 60–65. https://doi.
org/10.1126/science.342.6154.60196 Bibliografia
Boosten, K., Vandevelde, K., Derycke, H., Adriana te Kaat, Van Rossem, R. (2014). Careers
of doctorate holders survey 2010. Belgian Science Policy Office. https://biblio.ugent.be/
publication/5812799/file/5812805
Bornmann, L., Nast, I., Daniel, H.D. (2008). Do editors and referees look for signs of
scientific  misconduct  when  reviewing  manuscripts? A   quantitative  content  analy-
sis of studies that examined review criteria and reasons for accepting and rejecting
manuscripts for publication. Scientometrics, 77(3), 415–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-007-1950-2
Boudreau,  K.J.,  Guinan,  E.C.,  Lakhani,  K.R.,  Riedl,  C.  (2016).  Looking  across  and  
looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource al-
location in science. Management Science, 62(10), 2765–2783. https://doi.org/10.1287/
mnsc.2015.2285
Brailsford, I. (2010). Motives and aspirations for doctoral study: Career, personal, and in-
ter-personal factors in the decision to embark on a history PhD. International Journal
of Doctoral Studies, 5, 15–27. https://doi.org/10.28945/710
Brinn, T., Jones, M.J. (2007). Editorial boards in accounting: The power and the glory.
Accounting Forum, 31(1), 1–25.
Broadwell, M.M. (1969). Teaching for learning. The Gospel Guardian.
Bronfenbrenner,  U.  (1986).  Ecology  of  the  family  as  a  context  for  human  develop-
ment: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723–742. https://doi.
org/10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723
Brzeziński, J. M. (2004). Metodologia badań psychologicznych. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Bülow, W., Helgesson, G. (2018). Hostage authorship and the problem of dirty hands.
Research Ethics, 14(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016118764305
Buchan, J., Spokes, D. (2010). Do recorded abstracts from scientific meetings concur with
the research presented?. Eye, 24(4), 695–698. https://doi.org/10.1038/eye.2009.133
Burgess, H., Wellington, J. (2010). Exploring the impact of the professional doctorate
on students’ professional practice and personal development: Early indications. Work
Based Learning E-Journal, 1(1), 160–176.
Burt, R.S. (2001). Structural Holes versus Network Closure as Social Capital. W: N. Lin,
K.S. Cook, R.S. Burt (red.), Social Capital: Theory and research. Routledge.
Busse, T.V., Mansfield, R.S. (1984). Selected personality traits and achievement in male
scientists. The Journal of Psychology, 116(1), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/002239
80.1984.9923626
Byrom,  N.  (2020).  The  challenges  of  lockdown  for  early-career  researchers.  ELife,  9,
e59634. https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.59634
Cabezas-Clavijo, Á., Robinson-García, N., Escabias, M., & Jiménez-Contreras, E. (2013). Re-
viewers’ ratings and bibliometric indicators: Hand in hand when assessing over research
proposals? PLoS ONE, 8(6), e68258. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0068258
Cabrera, A.F., La Nasa, S.M. (2000). Understanding the college-choice process. New Di-
rections for Institutional Research, 2000(107), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1002/ir.10701 197 Bibliografia
Callaway, E. (2016). Open-access journal eLife gets £25-million boost. Nature, 534(7605),
14–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/534014a
Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (2012). Evaluation of the open operating grant pro-
gram: final report. https://cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/45846.html
Caplow, T., McGee, R.J. (1958). The Academic Marketplace. Basic Books.
Carter, S., Blumenstein, M., Cook, C. (2013) Different for women? The challenges of do-
ctoral studies. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(4), 339–351. http://doi.org/10.1080/1
3562517.2012.719159
Ceci, S.J. (1991). How much does schooling influence general intelligence and its cogni-
tive  components?  A  reassessment  of  the  evidence.  Developmental  Psychology,  27(5),
703–722. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.27.5.703
Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. (2011). O stanie szkolnictwa wyższego i źródłach jego
finansowania. Fundacja Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. https://www.cbos.pl/
SPISKOM.POL/2011/K_012_11.PDF
Chambers, D.W. (1983). Stereotypic images of the scientist: The draw-a-scientist test.
Science Education, 67(2), 255–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730670213
Chambers, J. A. (1964). Relating personality and biographical factors to scientific creativi-
ty. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 78(7), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1037/
h0093862
Charlton, B. G. (2009). Why are modern scientists so dull? How science selects for perse-
verance and sociability at the expense of intelligence and creativity. Medical Hypothe-
ses, 72(3), 237–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2008.11.020
Chisman, D. G. (1984). Science education and national development. Science Education,
68(5), 563–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730680506
Choi, J.N. (2004). Individual and contextual predictors of creative performance: The me-
diating role of psychological processes. Creativity Research Journal, 16(2–3), 187–199.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2004.9651452
Chruszczewski, M. (2013). Zdolności w akcji. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
Chudnovsky, D., López, A., Rossi, M.A., Ubfal, D. (2008). Money for science? The im-
pact of research grants on academic output. Fiscal Studies, 29(1), 75–87. http://do.or-
g:10.1111/j.1475-5890.2008.00069.x
Chung, K.C., Shauver, M.J. (2008). Fundamental principles of writing a successful grant
proposal.  The  Journal  of  Hand  Surgery,  33(4),  566–572.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jhsa.2007.11.028
Clance, P. R., Imes, S.A. (1978). The impostor phenomenon in high achieving women:
Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, and Practice,
15(3), 241–247.
Cole, J.R., Cole, S. (1973). Social stratification in science. University of Chicago Press.
Cole,  S.,  Cole,  J.R.,  Simon,  G.  (1981).  Chance  and  consensus  in  peer  review.  Science,
214(4523), 881–886. http://doi.org/10.1126/science.7302566198 Bibliografia
Cornér, S., Löfström, E., Pyhältö, K. (2017). The Relationships between doctoral stu-
dents’ perceptions of supervision and burnout. International Journal of Doctoral Stu-
dies, 12, 91–106. https://doi.org/10.28945/3754
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Projektowanie badań naukowych. Metody jakościowe, ilościowe i miesza-
ne. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Cunningham, J.A., O'Reilly, P., O'Kane, C., Mangematin, V. (2015). Managerial challen-
ges of publicly funded principal investigators. International Journal of Technology Mana-
gement, 68(3/4), 176. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2015.069669
Davidson, J. M., Lyons, M. (2018). Undergraduates as researchers – the impact of active
participation in research and conference presentation on psychology undergraduate
identity and career aspirations. Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice, 6(1),
39–46. https://doi.org/10.14297/jpaap.v6i1.320
Detterman, D.K., Ruthsatz, J. (1999). Toward a more comprehensive theory of excep-
tional  abilities.  Journal  for  the  Education  of  the  Gifted,  22(2),  148–158.  https://doi.
org/10.1177/016235329902200204
Dimitrios, N.K., Sakas, D. P., Vlachos, D.S. (2014). Modeling the scientific dimension  
of  academic  conferences.  Procedia  –  Social  and  Behavioral  Sciences,  147,  576–585.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.164
Edmondson, A.C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and
organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. The Journal
of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886396321001
Elliott, K.C., Settles, I.H., Montgomery, G.M., Brassel, S.T., Cheruvelil, K. S., Soranno,
P.A. (2016). Honorary authorship practices in environmental science teams: Structu-
ral and cultural factors and solutions. Accountability in Research, 24(2), 80–98. http://
doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2016.1251320
Endler, N.S. (1978). Beyond citation counts: Developing research profiles. Canadian Psycho-
logical Review/Psychologie Canadienne, 19, 152–157. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0081471
Engqvist,  L.,  Frommen,  J.G.  (2008).  The  h-index  and  self-citations.  Trends  in  Ecology  
& Evolution, 23(5), 250–252. doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.01.009
Ericsson, K.A. (1996). The road to expert performance: Empirical evidence from the arts and
sciences, sports, and games. Erlbaum.
European Commission. (2016). Europejska Karta Naukowca. Kodeks postępowania przy re-
krutacji pracowników naukowych. https://www.euraxess.pl/pl/poland/naukowcy/kar-
ta-i-kodeksnaukowcy
European Universities Association. (2010). Salzburg II Recommendations. https://eua.eu/
resources/publications/615:salzburg-ii-%E2%80%93-recommendations.html
Eurostat.  (2021).  Learning  mobility  statistics.  https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
-explained/index.php?title=Learning_mobility_statistics#Students_from_abroad
Falconer, A., Adragna, S. (2017). Personality types and persistence in doctoral students:
A mixed-methods study. Psychology and Behavioral Science International Journal, 2(5).
https://doi.org/10.19080/PBSIJ.2017.02.555598199 Bibliografia
Falagas, M. E., & Rosmarakis, E.S. (2006). Clinical decision-making based on findings
presented  in  conference  abstracts:  is  it  safe  for  our  patients?.  European  heart  jour-
nal, 27(17), 2038–2039. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehl175
Fanelli, D. (2010). “Positive” results increase down the hierarchy of the sciences. PLOS
ONE, 5(4), e10068. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0010068
Fang, F.C., Casadevall, A. (2015). Competitive science: Is competition ruining science?
Infection and Immunity, 83(4), 1229–1233. https://doi.org/10.1128/IAI.02939-14
Feist, G.J. (1993). A structural model of scientific eminence. Psychological Science, 4(6),
366–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00583.x
Feist,  G.J.  (1994).  Personality  and  working  style  predictors  of  integrative  complexity:
A study of scientists’ thinking about research and teaching. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 67(3), 474–484. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.474
Feist, G.J. (1998). A meta-analysis of the impact of personality on scientific and artistic cre -
ativity. Personality and Social Psychological Review, 2, 290–309. http://doi.org/10.1207/
s15327957pspr0204_5
Feist, G.J. (2006a). How development and personality influence scientific thought, interest,
and achievement. Review of General Psychology, 10, 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/
1089-2680.10.2.163
Feist, G.J. (2006b). The psychology of science and the origins of the scientific mind. Yale Univer-
sity Press.
Feist, G.J., Barron, F.X. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intel-
lect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 62–88. https://
doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00536-6
Ford, H. L., Brick, C., Blaufuss, K., Dekens, P. S. (2018). Gender inequity in speaking
opportunities at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting. Nature Communica-
tions, 9(1), 1358. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03809-5
Fox, C.W., Paine, C.E.T., Sauterey, B. (2016). Citations increase with manuscript length,
author number, and references cited in ecology journals. Ecology and Evolution, 6(21),
7717–7726. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.2505
Franzoni,  C.,  Scellato,  G.,  Stephan,  P.  (2014).  The  mover’s  advantage:  The  superior
performance of migrant scientists. Economics  Letters, 122(1), 89–93. https://doi.or-
g/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.10.040
Franzoni, C., Scellato, G., Stephan, P. (2015). International mobility of research scientists.
W: A. Geuna (red.), Global Mobility of Research Scientists (s. 35–65). Elsevier. https://
doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801396-0.00002-8
Freeling, B., Doubleday, Z.A., Connell, S.D. (2019). Opinion: How can we boost the im-
pact of publications? Try writing better. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
116(2), 341–343. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1819937116
Furnham, A., Hughes, D.J., Marshall, E. (2013). Creativity, OCD, narcissism and the big
five. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2013.05.003
FutureLib. (2015a). A day in the life of a researcher: Mid-career, solo researcher  [Prezentacja].
https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/252886200 Bibliografia
FutureLib. (2015b). A day in the life of a researcher: Early career, group researcher [Prezentacja].
https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/252884
Gardner, S.K. (2007). “I heard it through the grapevine”: Doctoral student socialization
in chemistry and history. Higher Education, 54(5), 723–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10734-006-9020-x
Gardner, S.K. (2009). Conceptualizing success in doctoral education: Perspectives of fa-
culty in seven disciplines. The Review of Higher Education, 32(3), 383–406. https://doi.
org/10.1353/rhe.0.0075
Garfield, E. (1996). “What is the primordial reference for the phrase ‘publish or perish’?”.
The Scientist, 10(12), 11–13.
Gill, P., Dolan, G. (2015). Originality and the PhD: What is it and how can it be demon-
strated? Nurse Researcher, 22(6), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.7748/nr.22.6.11.e1335
Giménez-Toledo, E., Román-Román, A. (2009). Assessment of humanities and social
sciences monographs through their publishers: A review and a study towards a model
of evaluation. Research Evaluation, 18(3), 201–213, http://doi.org/10.3152/09582020
9X471986
Gladwell, M. (2010). Poza schematem. Sekrety ludzi sukcesu. Wydawnictwo Znak.
Główny Urząd Statystyczny. (2020). Szkolnictwo wyższe i jego finanse w  2019 r. https://stat.
gov.pl/obszary-tematyczne/edukacja/edukacja/szkolnictwo-wyzsze-i-jego-finanse -
-w-2019-roku,2,16.html
Goncalo, J.A., Flynn, F.J., Kim, S.H. (2010). Are two narcissists better than one? The link
between  narcissism,  perceived  creativity,  and  creative  performance.  Personality  and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1484–1495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210385109
Goodhand, J., Giles, C., Wahed, M., Irving, P., Langmead, L., Rampton, D. (2011). Poster
presentations  at  medical  conferences:  An  effective  way  of  disseminating  research?  
Clinical Medicine, 11(2), 138–141. https://doi.org/10.7861/clinmedicine.11-2-138
Gopalan, C., Halpin, P.A., Johnson, K.M.S. (2018). Benefits and logistics of non-presen -
ting undergraduate students attending a professional scientific meeting. Advances in
Physiology Education, 42(1), 68–74. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00091.2017
Gosden, H. (2003). “Why not give us the full story?”: Functions of referees’ comments in
peer reviews of scientific research papers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(2),
87–101. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00037-1
Grant, W.D., Cone, D.C. (2015). If at first you don’t succeed: The fate of manuscripts
rejected  by  academic  emergency  medicine.  Academic  Emergency  Medicine,  22(10),  
1213–1217. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12763
Greenhaus,  J.H.,  Powell,  G.N.  (2006).  When  work  and  family  are  allies:  A  theory  of
work-family enrichment. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 72–92. https://doi.
org/10.2307/20159186
Grimes, D.R., Bauch, C.T., Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2018). Modelling science trustworthiness
under publish or perish pressure. Royal Society Open Science, 5(1), 171511. http://doi.
org/10.1098/rsos.171511201 Bibliografia
Gross,  K.,  Bergstrom,  C.T.  (2019).  Contest  models  highlight  inherent  inefficiencies  
of scientific funding competitions. PLOS Biology, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/jo-
urnal.pbio.3000065
Grosul, M. (2010). In search of the creative scientific personality. [Praca magisterska, San
Jose State University]. SJSU ScholarWorks. https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.9k3q-fumc
Grosul, M., Feist, G.J. (2014). The creative person in science. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creati-
vity, and The Arts, 8, 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034828
Grzybowski, A. (2015). Impact factor – benefits and limitations. Acta Ophthalmologica,
93(3), 201–202. http://doi.org/10.1111/aos.12579
Grzybowski, A., Patryn, R. (2017). Impact factor: Universalism and reliability of asses-
sment.  Clinics  in  Dermatology,  35(3),  331–334.  http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinderma-
tol.2016.07.012
Gui, Q., Liu, C., Du, D. (2018). International knowledge flows and the role of proximity.
Growth and Change, 49(3). http://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12245
Guthrie, S., Lichten, C.A., Van Belle, J., Ball, S., Knack, A., Hofman, J. (2018). Understan-
ding mental health in the research environment: A rapid evidence assessment. Rand
Health Quarterly, 7(3), 2.
Hackett, E.J., Chubin, D.E. (2003, February 25). Peer review for the 21st century: Applications
to education research. Prepared for a National Research Council Workshop, Washington.
Hair, M. (2006). Superqual. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(1), 9–23. doi:10.1177/
1469787406061140
Hall, W.B., MacKinnin, D.W. (1969). Personality inventory correlates of creativity among ar-
chitects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53(4), 322–326. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027811
Hauss, K. (2021). What are the social and scientific benefits of participating at academic
conferences? Insights from a survey among doctoral students and postdocs in Ger-
many. Research Evaluation, 30(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaa018
Hazell, C.M., Chapman, L., Valeix, S.F., Roberts, P., Niven, J.E., Berry, C. (2020). Un-
derstanding the mental health of doctoral researchers: A mixed methods systematic
review with meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Systematic Reviews, 9(1), 197. https://
doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01443-1
Helmreich, R.L., Spence, J.T., Beane, W.E., Lucker, G.W., Matthews, K.A. (1980). Making it
in academic psychology: Demographic and personality correlates of attainment. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 896–908. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.39.5.896
Herbert, D.L., Barnett, A.G., Clarke, P., Graves, N. (2013). On the time spent preparing
grant proposals: An observational study of Australian researchers. BMJ Open, 3(5),
e002800. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-002800
Hernández-Torrano, D., Ibrayeva, L., Sparks, J., Lim, N., Clementi, A., Almukhambeto-
va, A., Nurtayev, Y., Muratkyzy, A. (2020). Mental health and well-being of university
students: A bibliometric mapping of the literature. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1226.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01226202 Bibliografia
Hess, G., Tosney, K., Liegel, L. (2009). Creating effective poster presentations. AMEE Gu-
ide. Teaching and Learning, 40, 319–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/01421590902825131
Hill, J., Walkington, H. (2016). Developing graduate attributes through par ticipation in
undergraduate research conferences. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 40(2),
222–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2016.1140128
Hirsch, J.E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Pro-
ceedings of the National academy of Sciences, 102, 16569–16572. http://doi.org/10.1073/
pnas.0507655102
Hirsch, J.E., Buela-Casal, G. (2014). The meaning of the h-index. International Journal of Clini-
cal and Health Psychology, 14(2), 161–164. http://doi.org/10.1016/S1697-2600(14)70050-X
Hogan, R., Kaiser, R.B. (2005). What we know about leadership. Review of General Psycho-
logy, 9(2), 169–180. http://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.169
Holbrook, A., Shaw, K., Scevak, J., Bourke, S., Cantwell, R., Budd, J. (2014). PhD candidate
expectations: Exploring mismatch with experience. International Journal of Doctoral
Studies, 9, 329–346. https://doi.org/10.28945/2078
Hug, S.E., Aeschbach, M. (2020). Criteria for assessing grant applications: A systematic
review. Palgrave Communications, 6, 37. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-0412-9
Huisman, J., Smits, J. (2017). Duration and quality of the peer review process: The author’s
perspective. Scientometrics, 113(1), 633–650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5
Humphrey, M. (2005). ‘Getting Personal: Reflexivity and Autoethnographic Vignettes’.
Qualitative Inquiry, 11(6), 840–860.
Isbell, L.A., Young, T.P., Harcourt, A.H. (2012). Stag parties linger: Continued gender
bias  in  a  female-rich  scientific  discipline.  PLOS  ONE,  7(11),  e49682.  https://doi.
org/10.1371/journal.pone.0049682
Ives, G., Rowley, G. (2005). Supervisor selection or allocation and continuity of super-
vision:  Ph.D.  students’  progress  and  outcomes.  Studies  in  Higher  Education,  30(5),
535–555. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070500249161
Jacinto, T., van Helvoort, H., Boots, A., Skoczynski, S., Bjerg, A. (2014). Doing scien-
ce: Writing conference abstracts. Breathe, 10(3), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1183/
20734735.103214
Jacob, B.A., Lefgren, L. (2011). The impact of research grant funding on scientific produc -
tivity. Journal of Public Economics, 95, (9–10), 1168–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jpubeco.2011.05.005
Janger, J., Schmidt, N., Strauss, A. (2019). International differences in basic research grant
funding – a systematic comparison. Studien zum deutschen Innovationssystem, 9. http://
doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32565.93922
Jerrim, J., de Vries, R. (2020). Are peer-reviews of grant proposals reliable? An analysis
of Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funding applications. The Social
Science Journal, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/03623319.2020.1728506
Jonason, P.K., Webster, G.D. (2010). The dirty dozen: A concise measure of the dark triad.
Psychological Assessment, 22(2), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019265203 Bibliografia
Jones, M. (2013). Issues in doctoral studies – forty years of journal discussion: Where
have we been and where are we going?. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8(6),
83–104. http://doi.org/10.28945/1871
Jones, T.M., Fanson, K.V., Lanfear, R., Symonds, M.R.E., Higgie, M. (2014). Gender dif-
ferences in conference presentations: A consequence of self-selection? PeerJ, 2, e627.
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.627
Kanthraj, G. (2006). Journal impact factor. Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and
Leprology, 72(4), 322–325. http://doi.org/10.4103/0378-6323.26721
Karpe,  K.  (2017).  O  pogoni  za  wynikiem  istotnym  statystycznie.  Konsekwencje  rozpo-
wszechniania testowania istotności hipotezy zerowej w psychologii. Nauka, 1, 143–156.
Karwowski, M. (2006). Motywowanie uczniów do działań twórczych – między romanty-
zmem a behawioryzmem. Ruch Pedagogiczny, 3–4, 13–27.
Karwowski, M. (2010). Kreatywność – feeria rozumień, uwikłań, powodów. Teoretyczno-
-empiryczna prolegomena. W: M. Karwowski, A. Gajda (red.), Kreatywność (nie tylko)
w klasie szkolnej (s. 12–44). APS.
Karwowski, M., Gralewski, J. (2011). Zmotywowana kreatywność. Synergia motywacyjna
postawy twórczej młodzieży. Chowanna, 2, 45–58.
Karwowski, M., Lebuda, I. (2017). Creative self-concept: A surface characteristic of creati-
ve personality. W: G. Feist, R. Reiter-Palmon, J.C. Kaufman (red.), Cambridge handbook
of creativity and personality research (s. 84–101). Cambridge University Press.
Katz, L. (2000). Public speaking anxiety. UTM Counseling and Career Services, 1, 1–3.
Kaufman, J.C. (2011). Kreatywność. Wydawnictwo Akademii Pedagogiki Specjalnej.
Kaufman, J.C., Beghetto, R.A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativi-
ty. Review of General Psychology, 13, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013688
Kaufman, J.C., Glǎveanu, V.P. (2018). The road to uncreative science is paved with good
intentions: Ideas, implementations, and uneasy balances. Perspectives on Psychological
Science, 13(4), 457–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617753947
Kaufman, S.B. (2013). Opening up openness to experience: A four-factor model and rela-
tions to creative achievement in the arts and sciences. The Journal of Creative Behavior,
47(4), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.33
Kaufman, S.B., Quilty, L.C., Grazioplene, R.G., Hirsh, J.B., Gray, J.R., Peterson, J.B., DeY-
oung, C.G. (2015). Openness to experience and intellect differentially predict creative
achievement in the arts and sciences. Journal of Personality, 84(2), 248–158. http://doi.
org/10.1111/jopy.12156
Kearns, H., Gardiner, M. (2011). The care and maintenance of your adviser. Nature, 469,
570. https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7331-570a
Keely, B.R. (2004). Planning and creating effective scientific posters. Journal of Continuing
Education in Nursing, 35(4), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.3928/0022-0124-20040701-10
Kidwell, D.K. (2013). Principal investigators as knowledge brokers: A multiple case study
of the creative actions of PIs in entrepreneurial science’. Technological Forecasting and
Social Change, 80(2), 212–220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.05.004204 Bibliografia
King, D.W., Tenopir, C., Montgomery, C.H., Aerni, S.E. (2003). Patterns of journal use by
faculty at three diverse universities. D-Lib Magazine, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1045/
october2003-king
Kinman, G., Court, S. (2010). Psychosocial hazards in UK universities: Adopting a risk
assessment approach: Psychosocial hazards in UK universities. Higher Education Qu-
arterly, 64(4), 413–428. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2273.2009.00447.x
Kinman, G., Jones, F., Kinman, R. (2006). The well-being of the UK academy, 1998–2004.
Quality in Higher Education, 12(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538320600685081
Kneale, P., Edwards-Jones, A., Walkington, H., Hill, J. (2016). Evaluating undergraduate re-
search conferences as vehicles for novice researcher development. International Journal
for Researcher Development, 7(2), 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJRD-10-2015-0026
Kobayashi, K.D., Perez, K. (2015). A scientific poster is not a  scientific article! W: 2015
Hawaii International Conference on Education (HICE) (s. 1520–1530).
Kobayashi, S., Dolin, J., Søborg, A., Turner J. (2017). Building academic staff teaching
competencies. W: B. Stensaker (red.), Improving Teaching and Learning in Research-In-
tensive Universities (s. 1–19). Palgrave Macmillan.
Kocowski, T. (1991). Stymulatory i inhibitory aktywności badawczej. Zagadnienia Nauko-
znawstwa, 1, 57–97.
Koichiro, O., Hideo, O. (2020). Heterogeneous impacts of national research grants on
academic productivity. Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI), 20052.
Komisja Europejska. (2016). She Figures 2015 - Gender in Research and Innovation. http://
data.europa.eu/88u/dataset/she-figures-2015-gender-in-research-and-innovation
Komisja Europejska, Eurydice. (2017). Modernizacja szkolnictwa wyższego w Europie: kadra
akademicka – 2017. Luksemburg: Urząd Oficjalnych Publikacji Wspólnot Europej-
skich. http://doi.org/10.2797/372486
Kozielecki, J. (1997). Transgresja i kultura. Wydawnictwo Akademickie „Żak”.
Kram,  K.E.  (1985).  Mentoring  at  work:  Developmental  relationships  in  organizational  life.
Scott Foresman.
Kulczycki, E. (2017, 22 marzec). Uważajcie na oszustów w czasopismach. Warsztat badacza.
https://ekulczycki.pl/teoria_komunikacji/uwazajcie-na-oszustow-w-czasopismach/
Kulczycki, E. (2018). The diversity of monographs: Changing landscape of book evalu-
ation in Poland. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(6), 608–622. https://doi.
org/10.1108/AJIM-03-2018-0062
Kulczycki, E. (2019a). Procedury ewaluacji jednostek podstawowych i instytucji. Centrum Stu-
diów nad Polityką Publiczną UAM.
Kulczycki, E. (2019b). Wzory publikacyjne polskich naukowców w latach 2013–2016. Na-
uki humanistyczne i nauki społeczne. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7797527
Kulczycki, E. (2020, 5 maj). Redaktorzy naprawdę nie oczekują schematycznych tekstów.
Warsztat badacza. https://ekulczycki.pl/warsztat_badacza/redaktorzy-naprawde-nie-
oczekuja-schematycznych-tekstow/
Kulczycki, E., Rozkosz, E.A., Engels, T.C.E., Guns, R., Hołowiecki, M., Pölönen, J.,Cie-
reszko, K. (2019). Jak rozpoznać recenzowane publikacje – o etykietach z otwartymi 205 Bibliografia
danymi  recenzentów  w  monografiach  naukowych.  Nauka  i  Szkolnictwo  Wyższe,  
1–2(53–54), 183–217. https://doi.org/10.14746/nisw.2019.1-2.6
Kurtz-Costes, B., Andrews Helmke, L., Ülkü-Steiner, B. (2006). Gender and doctoral stu-
dies: The perceptions of ph.d. students in an american university. Gender and Educa-
tion, 18(2), 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250500380513
Kuzhabekova, A., Temerbayeva, A. (2018). The role of conferences in doctoral student
socialization. Studies in Graduate and Postdoctoral Education, 9(2), 181–196. https://
doi.org/10.1108/SGPE-D-18-00012
Kwiek, M. (2018a). Ustawa 2.0 a mierzalność i porównywalność osiągnięć naukowych.
Nauka, 1, 65–86.
Kwiek, M. (2018b). High research productivity in vertically undifferentiated higher edu-
cation systems: Who are the top performers? Scientometrics, 115(1), 415–462. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2644-7
Kwiek, M. (2018c). Uczelnie badawcze: Geografia produkcji wiedzy w  kontekście kon-
centracji zasobów i akumulacji prestiżu. Nauka i Szkolnictwo Wyższe, 1(51), 7–14.
Kwiek, M. (2019). Modele kariery naukowej i atrakcyjność profesji akademickiej. Seria
Raportów Centrum Studiów nad Polityką Publiczną UAM, 2, 1–58.
Lachowska, B. (2012). Praca i rodzina – konflikt czy synergia? Konflikt i facylitacja między
rolami rodzinnymi i zawodowymi – uwarunkowania i znaczenie dla jakości życia kobiet
i mężczyzn. Wydawnictwo KUL.
Lapeña, J.F., Peh, W.C. (2019). Various types of scientific articles. W: M. Shoja, A. Aryn -
chyna, M. Loukas, A.V. D’Antoni, S.M. Buerger, M. Karl, R.S. Tubbs (red.), A Guide to
the Scientific Career, (s. 351–355). http://doi.org/10.1002/9781118907283.ch37
Larivière, V., Macaluso, B., Archambault, É., Gingras, Y. (2010). Which scientific elites?
On the concentration of research funds, publications and citations. Research Evalu-
ation, 19(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820210X492495
Lauchlan, E. (2019). Nature PhD survey 2019. Shift Learning. https://figshare.com/s/74a -
5ea79d76ad66a8af8
Lauer, M. (2016, 28 października). Are you on the fence about whether to resubmit?
https://nexus.od.nih.gov/all/2016/10/28/are-you-on-the-fence-about-whether-to-
-resubmit/
Lebuda,  I.,  Figura,  B.,  Karwowski,  M.  (2021).  Creativity  and  the  dark  triad:  A  meta-
-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 92, 104088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.
2021.104088
Levecque, K., Anseel, F., De Beuckelaer, A., Van der Heyden, J., Gisle, L. (2017). Work
organization and mental health problems in PhD students. Research Policy, 46(4), 868–
879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.008
Lim, H.S., Choi, J.N. (2009). Testing an alternative relationship between individual and
contextual predictors of creative performance. Social Behavior and Personality: An In-
ternational Journal, 37(1), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2009.37.1.117
Liu, W. (2017). The changing role of non-english papers in scholarly communication:
Evidence from Web of Science’s three journal citation indexes: The changing role 206 Bibliografia
of non-English papers. Learned Publishing, 30(2), 115–123. http://doi.org/ 10.1002/
leap.1089
Lohman, D.F. (2009). The contextual assessment of talent. W: B. MacFarlane, T. Stam-
baugh, (red.), Leading change in gifted education: The festschrift of Dr. Joyce Vantassel-Baska
(s. 229–242). Prufrock Press.
Loissel, E., Tsang, E., Müller, S.R., Deathridge, J., Pérez Valle, H., Yehudi, Y., Cheke, L. (2020).
The experiences of those who support researchers struggling with their mental health. Apollo  
– University of Cambridge Repository. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.60247
Lounsbury, J.W., Foster, N., Patel, H., Carmody, P., Gibson, L.W., Stairs, D.R. (2012). An inve-
stigation of the personality traits of scientists versus nonscientists and their relationship
with career satisfaction. R&D Management, 42, 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-
-9310.2011.00665.x
Lovejoy, T.I., Revenson, T.A., France, C.R. (2011). Reviewing manuscripts for peer-review
journals: A primer for novice and seasoned reviewers. Annals of Behavioral Medicine:
A Publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 42(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12160-011-9269-x
Lovitts, B.E. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from
doctoral study. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
Lubinski, D., Benbow, C.P., Webb, R.M., Bleske-Rechek, A. (2006). Tracking exceptional
human capital over two decades. Psychological Science, 17(3), 194–199. https://doi.or-
g/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01685.x
Lutostański, M. (2017). Badanie potencjału nowego programu studiów III stopnia. [Nie-
opublikowany raport przygotowany przez firmę 4P Research Mix dla Interdyscypli-
narnej Szkoły Doktorskiej Uniwersytetu SWPS].
Lutostański, M., Prochera, P. (2018). Badanie Doktorantów Uniwersytetu SWPS. [Nie-
opublikowany raport przygotowany przez Kantar Millward Brown dla Interdyscypli-
narnej Szkoły Doktorskiej SWPS].
Łapiński, W. (2006). Oczekiwania studentów wobec studiów magisterskich z dziedziny
zarządzania a stopień ich zaspokojenia na przykładzie Wydziału Zarządzania UW.
Studia i Materiały Wydziału Zarządzania Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 2, 98–111.
Łazarowicz-Kowalik, M. (2019). Nauka dla siłaczek. Nauka, 4, 69–90. https://doi.org/
10.24425/nauka.2019.131143
Ma,  A.,  Mondragón,  R.J.,  Latora,  V.  (2015).  Anatomy  of  funded  research  in  science.
Proceedings  of  the  National  Academy  of  Sciences,  112(48),  14760–14765.  http://doi.
org.10.1073/pnas.1513651112
Määttä, K. (2015). A good supervisor–Ten facts of caring supervision. International Educa-
tion Studies, 8(9), 185. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n9p185
Määttä, K., Uusiautti, S. (2018). The psychology of study success in universities. Routledge.
Macek, B. E., Scholz, C., Atzmueller, M., Stumme, G. (2012). Anatomy of a conferen-
ce. W: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media – HT ’12  
(s. 245–254). https://doi.org/10.1145/2309996.2310038207 Bibliografia
MacIntosh-Murray, A. (2007). Poster presentations as a genre in knowledge communica-
tion: A case study of forms, norms, and values. Science Communication, 28(3), 347–376.
http://doi.org/10.1177/1075547006298251
Martin, A. J., Marsh, H. W. (2009). Academic resilience and academic buoyancy: Mul-
tidimensional and hierarchical conceptual framing of causes, correlates and cogna-
te constructs. Oxford Review of Education, 35(3), 353–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/
03054980902934639
Martin,  B.  (1986).  Academic  exploitation.  W:  B.  Martin,  C.M.A.  Baker,  C.  Manwell,
C.  Pugh  (red.).  Intellectual  suppression:  Australian  case  histories,  analysis  and  responses  
(s. 59–62). Angus and Robertson.
Martinez, E., Ordu, C., Della Sala, M. R., McFarlane, A. (2013). Striving to obtain a scho-
ol-work-life balance: The full-time doctoral student. International Journal of Doctoral
Studies, 8, 39–59. https://doi.org/10.28945/1765
Mason, C.L., Kahle, J.B., Gardner, A.L. (1991). Draw-a-scientist test: Future implications.
School Science and Mathematics, 91(5), 193–198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.
1991.tb12078.x
Mason,  M.  (2013,  5  sierpień).  The  baby  penalty.  The  chronicle.  https://www.chronicle.
com/article/the-baby-penalty/
Mason, M., Wolfinger, N., Goulden, M. (2013). Do babies matter?: Gender and family in
the ivory tower. Rutgers University Press, 8(1), 120–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/194078
82.2014.987090
McAleese, M., Bladh, A., Bode, C., Muehlfeit, J., Berger, V., Petrin, T., Tsoukalis, L. (2013).
Improving the quality of teaching and learning in Europe’s higher education institutions. High
level group on the modernisation of higher education (Report to the European Commis-
sion). Publication Office of the European Union
McCrae, R.R. (1987). Creativity, divergent thinking, and openness to experience. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(6), 1258–1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.52.6.1258
McCulloch, A., Guerin, C., Jayatilaka, A., Calder, P., Ranasinghe, D. (2017). Choosing to
study for PhD: A framework for examining decision to become a research student.
Higher Education Review, 49(2), 85–106.
McGarty, C. (2000). The citation impact factor in social psychology: A bad statistic that
encourages bad science? Current Research in Social Psychology, 5(1), 1–16.
McKie, A. (2021, 19 lipca). University staff less happy and more anxious than UK avera-
ge. Times higher education. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/university-
staff-less-happy-and-more-anxious-uk-average
Melin, G. (2000). Pragmatism and self-organization. Research Policy, 29(1), 31–40. http://
doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(99)00031-1
Meneghini, R., Packer, A.L. (2007). Is there science beyond English?: Initiatives to incre-
ase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down
language barriers in scientific communication. EMBO Reports, 8(2), 112–116. http://
doi.org. 10.1038/sj.embor.7400906208 Bibliografia
Merton, R.K. (1973). Multiple discoveries as strategic research site. W: R.K. Merton (red.),
The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (s. 371–382). University
of Chicago Press.
Michno,  M.,  Lib,  W.  (2019).  Czynniki  wpływające  na  wybór  kierunku  studiów  przez
studentów – badania pilotażowe. Edukacja – Technika – Informatyka, 30(4), 311–317.
https://doi.org/10.15584/eti.2019.4.43
Miller, D.I., Nolla, K.M., Eagly, A.H. and Uttal, D.H. (2018). The development of children’s
gender-science stereotypes: A meta-analysis of 5 decades of U.S. draw-a-scientist stu-
dies. Child Development, 89(6), 1943–1955. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13039
Moosa, I. (2018). Publish or perish: Origin and perceived benefits. W: I. Moosa (red.),
Publish  or  perish  (s.  1–17).  Edward  Elgar  Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.4337/9781
786434937.00007
Morell, T. (2015). International conference paper presentations: A multimodal analysis
to determine effectiveness. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 137–150. https://doi.or-
g/10.1016/j.esp.2014.10.002
Mulder, M. (2014). Conceptions of professional competence. W: S. Billett, C. Harteis,
H. Gruber (red.), International Handbook of Research in Professional and Practice-based
Learning (s. 107–137). Springer.
Mumford, M.D., Connelly, M.S., Scott, G., Espejo, J., Sohl, L.M., Hunter, S. T., Bedell, K. E.  
(2005). Career experiences and scientific performance: A  study of social, physical,
life, and health sciences. Creativity Research Journal, 17(2–3), 105–129. https://doi.org
/10.1080/10400419.2005.9651474
Narendorf, S.C., Small, E., Cardoso, J.A.B., Wagner, R.W., Jennings, S.W. (2015). Mana-
ging and mentoring: Experiences of assistant professors in working with research
assistants. Social Work Research, 40(1), 19–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/svv037
Narodowe Centrum Nauki. (2012). Raport roczny 2012. https://www.ncn.gov.pl/sites/
default/files/pliki/centrum-prasowe/raport_NCN_2012_PL.pdf
Narodowe Centrum Nauki. (2019). Raport Roczny 2019. https://www.ncn.gov.pl/sites/
default/files/pliki/centrum-prasowe/NCN_raport_2019.pdf
National Research Council. (1990). On time to the doctorate: A Study of the lengthening
time to completion for doctorates in science and engineering. The National Academies
Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/1401
National Research Council. (2015). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science. https://doi.
org/10.17226/19007
National Science Board. (2014). Reducing investigators’ administrative workload for federal-
ly  funded  research.  National  Science  Foundation.  https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2014/
nsb1418/nsb1418.pdf
Neisser, U., Boodoo, G., Bouchard, T.J., Jr., Boykin, A.W., Brody, N., Ceci, S.J., Halpern,
D.F., Loehlin, J.C., Perloff, R., Sternberg, R.J., Urbina, S. (1996). Intelligence: Knowns
and unknowns. American  Psychologist,  51(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
-066X.51.2.77
Nęcka, E. (2001). Psychologia twórczości. Wydawnictwo GWP.209 Bibliografia
Nęcka, E., Stocki, R. (2006). Jak pisać prace z psychologii? Poradnik dla studentów i badaczy.
Wydawnictwo Universitas.
O’Boyle, E.J., Forsyth, D.R., Banks, G.C., McDaniel, M.A. (2012). A meta-analysis of
the Dark Triad and work behavior: A social exchange perspective. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 97, 557–579. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0025679
Open  Science  Collaboration.  (2015).  Estimating  the  reproducibility  of  psychological
science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
Parish, A.J., Boyack, K.W., Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2018). Dynamics of co-authorship and pro-
ductivity across different fields of scientific research. PLOS ONE, 13(1), e0189742.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189742
Park, G., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C.P. (2007). Contrasting intellectual patterns predict
creativity  in  the  arts  and  sciences:  Tracking  intellectually  precocious  youth  over
25 years. Psychological Science, 18(11), 948–952. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.
2007.02007.x
Park, G., Lubinski, D., Benbow, C.P. (2008). Ability differences among people who have
commensurate  degrees  matter  for  scientific  creativity.  Psychological  Science,  19(10),
957–961. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02182.x
Parkman, A. (2016). The imposter phenomenon in higher education: Incidence and im-
pact. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice. 16(1), 51–60.
Penny, D. (2017). Nature Graduate Survey. Figshare. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figsha -
re.5480716.v3
Perrine, N. E., Brodersen, R. (2005). Artistic and scientific creative behavior: Openness
and the mediating role of interests. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 217–236.
Pier, E.L., Brauer, M., Filut, A., Kaatz, A., Raclaw, J., Nathan, M.J., Ford, C.E., Carnes,
M. (2018). Low agreement among reviewers evaluating the same NIH grant applica-
tions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(12), 2952–2957. https://doi.
org/10.1073/pnas.1714379115
Pilch, I. (2008). Osobowość makiawelisty i jego relacje z ludźmi. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu
Śląskiego.
Popper, K. R. (1959/2002). The logic of scientific discovery. Basic Books.
Purvis, A. (2006). The h index: Playing the numbers game. Trends in Ecology & Evolution,
21(8), 422–422. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.05.014
Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J., Keskinen, J. (2012). Exploring the fit between doctoral students’
and supervisors’ perceptions of resources and challenges vis-à-vis the doctoral jour-
ney. International Journal of Doctoral studies, 7, 395–414. https://doi.org/10.28945/1745
Pyhältö, K., Vekkaila, J., Keskinen, J. (2015). Fit matters in the supervisory relationship:
Doctoral students and supervisors’ perceptions about the supervisory activities. In-
novations in Education and Teaching International, 52(1), 4–16. https://doi.org/10.1080
/14703297.2014.981836
Querol, J.M. (2014). Chair’s multimodal discourse: Governing the flow of the interaction
in the discussion sessions of a specialized conference, ESP Today, 2(1), 48–70.210 Bibliografia
Raddon, A. (2002). Mothers in the Academy: Positioned and positioning within discour-
ses of the „successful academic” and the „good mother”. Studies in Higher Education,
27(4), 387–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/0307507022000011516
Rawat, S., Meena, S. (2014). Publish or perish: Where are we heading? Journal of Research
in Medical Sciences, 19(2), 87–89.
Retowski, S., Podsiadły, M.J. (2016). Gdy nasza praca pasuje do naszych wartości. Ocena
zgodności wartości własnych i organizacji a wypalenie zawodowe. Psychologia Społecz-
na, 11(1), 56–68. https://doi.org/10.7366/1896180020163605
Roediger, H.L. (2006). The h index in science: A new measure of scholarly contribution.
Academic Observer, 19(4).
Rowe, N., Ilic, D. (2015). Rethinking poster presentations at large-scale scientific me -
etings—Is it time for the format to evolve? FEBS Journal, 282(19), 3661–3668. https://
doi.org/10.1111/febs.13383
Rowley-Jolivet,  E.  (2012).  Oralising  text  slides  in  scientific  conference  presentations:
A multimodal corpus analysis. W: A. Boulton, S. Carter-Thomas, E. Rowley-Jolivet
(red.), Studies in Corpus Linguistics (t. 52, s. 135–166). John Benjamins Publishing Com-
pany. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.52.06row
Rowley-Jolivet, E., Carter-Thomas, S. (2005). The rhetoric of conference presentation in-
troductions: Context, argument and interaction. International Journal of Applied Lin-
guistics, 15(1), 45–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2005.00080.x
Rozycki, W., Kaneko, E., Danielewicz-Betz, A. (2013). Oral presentation at internatio-
nal engineering conferences: Effects of the local on the global. W: IEEE Internatio-
nal  Professonal  Communication  2013  Conference  (s.  1–5).  https://doi.org/10.1109/
IPCC.2013.6623930
Ryan, R.M., Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions
and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54–67. https://doi.org/
10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Rychlik, M., Theus, M. (2019). Otwarty dostęp do piśmiennictwa naukowego. Przegląd
funkcjonujących form – legalnych i nielegalnych. Biblioteka, 22(31), 157–174. https://
doi.org/10.14746/b.2018.22.9
Saitz, R., Schwitzer, G. (2020). Communicating science in the time of a pandemic. JAMA,
324(5), 443. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.12535
Sajdak, A. (2015). Przygotowanie nauczycieli akademickich do prowadzenia zajęć dy-
daktycznych – możliwości wsparcia i przykłady dobrych praktyk. Studia Oeconomica
Posnaniensia, 3(5), 7–27.
Salzl, G., Gölder, S., Timmer, A., Marienhagen, J., Schölmerich, J., Grossmann, J. (2008).
Poster exhibitions at national conferences. Deutsches Aerzteblatt Online, 105(5), 78–83.
https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2008.0078
Saryusz-Wolski, T., Piotrowska, D. (2011). Internacjonalizacja: mobilność studentów. W:
M. Martyniuk (red.), Internacjonalizacja studiów wyższych (s. 43–57). Fundacja Rozwo-
ju Systemu Edukacji.211 Bibliografia
Scherer, R. W., Saldanha, I.J. (2019). How should systematic reviewers handle conference
abstracts? A view from the trenches. Systematic Reviews, 8(1). http://doi.org/10.1186/
s13643-019-1188-0
Schmidt, M., Umans, T. (2014). Experiences of well-being among female doctoral stu-
dents in Sweden. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being,
9(1), 23059. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v9.23059
Scholz, C., Atzmueller, M., Kibanov, M., Stumme, G. (2014). Predictability of evolving
contacts and triadic closure in human face-to-face proximity networks. Social  Ne-
twork Analysis and Mining, 4(1), 217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-014-0217-1
Schroter, S., Tite, L., Hutchings, A., Black, N. (2006). Differences in review quality and
recommendations for publication between peer reviewers suggested by authors or by
editors. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 295(3), 314–317. https://
doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.3.314
Selvi, K., Lang, P. (2010). Teachers’ competencies: Cultura International Journal of Philoso-
phy of Culture and Axiology, 7(1), 167–175. https://doi.org/10.5840/cultura20107133
Shelestun,  K.  (2013).  Factors  of  realization  and  differentiation  scientific  potencial  of
young scientists. Journal of Education Culture and Society, 4(2), 239–246. https://doi.
org/10.15503/jecs20132.239.246
Siemieńska, R. (2007). The Puzzle of gender research productivity in polish universities.
W: R. Siemieńska, A. Zimmer, (red.). Gendered career trajectories in academia cross-natio-
nal perspective (s.241–266). Scholar.
Silvia, P.J., Winterstein, B.P., Willse, J.T., Barona, C.M., Cram, J.T., Hess, K.I., Martinez,
J.L., Richard, C.A. (2008). Assessing creativity with divergent thinking tasks: Explo-
ring the reliability and validity of new subjective scoring methods. Psychology of Aesthe-
tics, Creativity, and the Arts, 2(2), 68–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-3896.2.2.68
Simkhada, P., Van Teijlingen, E., Hundley, V., Simkhada, B. (2015). Writing an abstract for
a scientific conference. Kathmandu University Medical Journal, 11(3), 262–265. https://
doi.org/10.3126/kumj.v11i3.12518
Simonton, D. K. (2002). Great psychologists and their times: Scientific insights into psychology’s
history. American Psychological Association.
Simonton, D.K. (2010). Geniusz. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo APS.
Simonton, D.K. (2013). After Einstein: Scientific genius is extinct. Nature,  493(7434),
602. http://doi.org/10.1038/493602a
Simonton, D.K. (2014a). Creative performance, expertise acquisition, individual diffe-
rences, and developmental antecedents: An integrative research agenda. Intelligence,
45, 66–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2013.04.007
Simonton, D.K. (2014b). Significant samples—Not significance tests! The often overlo -
oked solution to the replication problem. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
8(1), 11–12. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035849
Slade, M. (2010). Mental illness and well-being: The central importance of positive psy-
chology and recovery approaches. BMC Health Services Research, 10(1), 26. https://doi.
org/10.1186/1472-6963-10-26212 Bibliografia
Smith, N.B., Works, E.G. (2012). The complete book of grant writing: Learn to write like a pro-
fessional. Sourcebooks.
Smużewska, M., Wasielewski, K., Antonowicz, K. (2015). Niepowodzenia w studiowaniu
z perspektywy uczelni i studentów. Edukacja, 4(135), 130–146.
Sorokowski, P., Kulczycki, E., Sorokowska, A., Pisanski, K. (2017). Predatory journals
recruit fake editor. Nature, 543, 481–483. http://doi.org/10.1038/543481a
Sousa, B.J., Clark, A.M. (2019). Six insights to make better academic conference posters.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919
862370
Stanley, J. (1995). Pain(t) For healing: The academic conference and the classed/embo-
died self. W: L. Morley, V. Walsh. (red.). Feminist Academics: Creative Agents for Change
(s. 169–182). Taylor & Francis.
Sternberg, R.J., Hojjat, M., Brigockas, M.G., Grigorenko, E.L. (1997). Getting in: Criteria
for acceptance of manuscripts in psychological bulletin, 1993–1996. Psychological Bul-
letin, 121(2), 321–323. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.2.321
Sternberg, R.J., Horvath, J.A. (1999). Tacit knowledge in professional practice: Researcher and
practitioner perspectives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Sternberg, R.J., O’Hara, L.A. (2009). Creativity and intelligence. W: R.J. Sternberg (red.),
Handbook of creativity (s. 251–272). University press.
Strelau, J. (2014). Psychologia różnic indywidualnych. Wydawnictwo Scholar.
Stubb, J., Pyhältö, K., Lonka, K. (2011). Balancing between inspiration and exhaustion:
PhD students’ experienced socio-psychological well-being. Studies in Continuing Edu-
cation, 33(1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2010.515572
Stumpf, H. (1995). Scientific creativity: A  short overview. Educational Psychology Review,
7(3), 225–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02213372
Subotnik, R.F., Steiner, C.L. (1994). Adult manifestations of adolescent talent in scien-
ce: A longitudinal study of 1983 Westinghouse Science Talent Search winners. W:  
R.F., Subotnik, K.D. Arnold (red.), Beyond Terman: Contemporary longitudinal studies  
of giftedness and talent (s. 52–76). Ablex Publishing.
Sudheesh, K., Duggappa, D.R., Nethra, S.S. (2016). How to write a research proposal?. In-
dian Journal of Anaesthesia, 60(9), 631–634. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5049.190617
Suebtrakul, S., Adams, P., Vutikes, P., Titapiwatanakun, B., Adams, P., Kaewkungwal,
J. (2021). Perceptions of successful domestic and international research grant appli-
cations among experienced and novice researchers. Journal of Health Research, 35(6),
527–539. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHR-12-2019-0286
Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Swales, J.M., Feak, C. (2000). English in today’s research world: A writer’s guide. Michigan
University Press.
Szen-Ziemiańska,  J.  (2014).  Relationships  between  beliefs  about  scientific  work  and
creative achievements in science: A preliminary version of the orientations towards 213 Bibliografia
scientific  work  scale.  Creativity:  Theories-Research-Applications,  1,  88–106.  http//doi.
org/10.15290/ctra.2014.01.01.06
Szen-Ziemiańska, J. (2015). Uwarunkowania osiągnięć twórczych na wczesnych etapach ka-
riery naukowej. [Nieopublikowana rozprawa doktorska]. SWPS Uniwersytet Humani-
stycznospołeczny w Warszawie.
Szen-Ziemiańska, J. (2020). Facilitating a mentoring programme for doctoral students:
Insights  from  evidence-based  practice.  International  Journal  of  Doctoral  Studies,  15,
415–431. https://doi.org/10.28945/4594
Teichler, U. (2012). International student mobility and the bologna process. Research in
Comparative  and  International  Education,  7(1),  34–49.  https://doi.org/10.2304/rcie.
2012.7.1.34
Teichler, U. (2015). Academic mobility and migration: What we know and what we do not
know. European Review, 23(1), 6–37. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1062798714000787
Tokarz, A. (1991). Stymulatory i inhibitory pracy badawczej. (Część 1) Samodzielni i nie-
samodzielni pracownicy nauki. Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa, 2, 179–191.
Tokarz, A. (1998). Motywacja hubrystyczna i poznawcza jako dominanty systemu moty-
wacji do pracy naukowej. Przegląd psychologiczny, 41, 121–134.
Tokarz, A. (2005). Dynamika procesu twórczego. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Tunzelmann, N., Ranga, M., Martin, B., Geuna, A. (2003). The effects of size on research per-
formance: A SPRU Review. [Report prepared for the Office of Science and Technology].
Tytherleigh, M. Y., Webb, C., Cooper, C.L., Ricketts, C. (2005). Occupational stress in UK hi-
gher education institutions: A comparative study of all staff categories. Higher Education
Research & Development, 24(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436052000318569
van Noorden, R., Chawla, D.S. (2019). Hundreds of extreme self-citing scientists revealed
in  the  new  database.  Nature,  572(7771),  578–579.  http://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-
019-02479-7
van Rooyen, S., Delamothe, T., Evans, S.J.W. (2010). Effect on peer review of telling revie-
wers that their signed reviews might be posted on the web: Randomised controlled
trial. BMJ, 341(2), 5729–5729. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c5729
van Rooyen, S., Godlee, F., Evans, S., Black, N., Smith, R. (1999). Effect of open peer re-
view on quality of reviews and on reviewers’ recommendations: A randomised trial.
BMJ, 318(7175), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.318.7175.23
Van Zelst, R.H., Kerr, W.A. (1954). Personality self-assessment of scientific and technical
personnel. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 145–147.
Vavryčuk, V. (2018). Fair ranking of researchers and research teams. PLOS ONE, 13(4),
e0195509. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195509
Wagner,  C.  S.,  Leydesdorff,  L.  (2005).  Network  structure,  self-organization,  and  the
growth  of  international  collaboration  in  science.  Research  Policy,  34,  1608–1618.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.08.002
Wagner, I. (2011). Becoming transnational professional: Kariery i mobilność polskich elit nauko-
wych. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar.214 Bibliografia
Wahls, W.P. (2016). Biases in grant proposal success rates, funding rates and award si-
zes affect the geographical distribution of funding for biomedical research. PeerJ, 4,
e1917. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1917
Wao, H.O., Onwuegbuzie, A.J. (2011). A mixed research investigation of factors related to
time to the doctorate in education. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 6, 115–134.
https://doi.org/10.28945/1505
Ware, M. (2008). Peer review in scholarly journals: Perspective of the scholarly communi-
ty – Results from an international study. Information Services & Use, 28(2), 109–112.
https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-2008-0568
Ware, M., Mabe, M. (2015). The STM report: An overview of scientific and scholarly jour-
nal publishing. Copyright, Fair, Use, Scholarly Communication, etc., 9. http://digitalcom-
mons.unl.edu/scholcom/9
Wecker, C. (2012). Slide presentations as speech suppressors: When and why learners miss
oral information. Computers and Education, 59, 260–273. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
compedu.2012.01.013.
Weidman, J.C., Twale, D.J., Stein, E.L. (2001). Socialization of graduate and professional
students in higher education: A perilous passage? ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Re-
port, 28(3). Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series.
Weiner, J., Weiner 3, J. (2018). Technika pisania i prezentowania przyrodniczych prac badaw-
czych. Wydawnictwo PWN.
Wellington, J. (2013). Searching for ‘doctorateness’. Studies in Higher Education, 38(10),
1490–1503. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.634901
Wojciszke, B. (2006). Systematycznie Modyfikowane Replikacje: Logika programu badań
empirycznych w psychologii. W: J. Brzeziński (red.), Metodologia bada psychologicznych.
Wybór tekstów. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Wojciszke, B. (2019). Psychologia społeczna. Wydawnictwo Scholar.
Wollast, R., Boudrenghien, G., Van der Linden, N., Galand, B., Roland, N., Devos, C.,
de  Clercq,  M.,  Klein,  O.,  Azzi,  A.,  Frenay,  M.  (2018).  Who  are  the  doctoral  stu-
dents who drop out? Factors associated with the rate of doctoral degree completion
in  universities.  International  Journal  of  Higher  Education,  7(4),  143.  http://doi.
org/10.5430/ijhe.v7n4p143
Woolston, C. (2017). Graduate survey: A love–hurt relationship. Nature, 550, 549–552.
https://doi.org/10.1038/nj7677-549a
Wuchty, S., Jones, B.F., Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production
of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1136099
Wulff, S., Swales, J.M., Keller, K. (2009). “We have about seven minutes for questions”: The
discussion sessions from a specialized conference. English  for  Specific  Purposes, 28(2),
79–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.11.002
Wycisk,  A.,  Kałamarz,  M.,  Chojecki,  J.,  Parzych,  D.,  Modrzejewska,  K.,  Wiśniewska,
A.  (2018).  Potrzeby  i  oczekiwania  młodych  naukowców  związane  z  rozwojem  zawodo-
wej  kariery  naukowej.  Euraxess  Poland.  https://www.euraxess.pl/pl/poland/news/potrzeby-i-oczekiwania-m%C5%82odych-naukowc%C3%B3w-zwi%C4%85zane-z-r
ozwojem-zawodowej-kariery-naukowej
Yemini,  M.  (2019).  International  research  collaborations  as  perceived  by  top-perfor-
ming scholars. Journal of Studies in International Education, 25(1), 3–18. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1028315319887392
Zieliński, J. (2012). Metodologia pracy naukowej. Wydawnictwo ASPRA-JR.
Zuckerman, H. (1977). Scientific elite. Free Press.
Źródła prawne
Rozporządzenie  Ministra  Nauki  i  Szkolnictwa  Wyższego  z  dnia  7  listopada  2018  r.
w sprawie sporządzania wykazów wydawnictw monografii naukowych oraz czaso -
pism  naukowych  i  recenzowanych  materiałów  z  konferencji  międzynarodowych.
https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20180002152
Rozporządzenie Ministra Nauki i Szkolnictwa Wyższego z dnia 22 lutego 2019 r. w spra-
wie  ewaluacji  jakości  działalności  naukowej.  https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/Do-
cDetails.xsp?id=WDU20190000392
Ustawa z dnia 20 lipca 2018 r. – Prawo o szkolnictwie wyższym i nauce. Dz. U. 2018
poz. 1668. https://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/download.xsp/WDU20180001668/U/
D20181668Lj.pdf