Search results

Das Lernumfeld und die Betreuungsvernetzung charakterisieren die Promotionsphase. Doch besteht ein Zusammenhang zwischen der Promotionsbetreuung und der beruflichen Entwicklung? Die Studie analysierte wissenschaftliche Netzwerke von 41 Promovierten eines Bildungsforschungsverbunds in Deutschland. Die Datenerhebung umfasste ihre wissenschaftlichen Aktivitäten (Publikationen, Forschungsprojekte; 2000 bis 2010) und ihre berufliche Entwicklung. Die Promotionsbetreuung wurde methodisch mithilfe der Typenbildung analysiert, wodurch drei Konstellationen identifiziert wurden: der individuelle Typ mit starken Betreuungsbeziehungen, der Team-Typ mit breiten Netzwerken und der 'community of practice'-Typ mit vielen schwachen Beziehungen. Die Ergebnisse zeigen schwache Zusammenhänge zwischen der erreichten beruflichen Position und dem Lernumfeld sowie den Betreuungsnetzwerken. Professor/innen entwickelten häufiger große wissenschaftliche Netzwerke mit schwachen Beziehungen und profitierten von größeren Betreuungsnetzwerken. Demnach sinkt der Stellenwert der Betreuungsbeziehung bei höheren wissenschaftlichen Positionen. Zugleich bieten größere Forschungsteams ein höheres Vernetzungspotential. (DIPF/Orig.).;;;The learning environment and the supervision network characterize the promotion phase. But is there a connection between supervision and professional career? In this study, academic networks of 41 former Ph.D. students were analyzed, who took part in an educational research program in Germany. The collected data consist of their academic activities (publications and research projects from 2000 to 2010) and their professional career. The supervisor relationship was analyzed using qualitative typology as method and identifying three constellations: an individual type with strong supervisor relationships, a team type with broad networks and a 'community of practice'-type with many weak relationships. The results show a weak connection between the achieved academic position and learning environment as well as supervisor network. Professors had built large academic networks with weak relationships more often and benefited from supervision groups involving peers. In conclusion, the importance of the supervisor relationship declines with rising academic position. At the same time, larger research teams offer a higher networking potential. (DIPF/Orig.).

Abstract
This chapter examines the relationship between religiosity and positive emotions. It first reviews predictors of psychological well-being, examining various psychological theories of well-being that involve demographic factors, genetic influences, satisfaction of goals, and cognitive processes having to do with reference points in comparison to others. Next, it examines the impact of well-being on health more generally, including effects on social relationships, work performance, and psychological resilience, as well as on physical health and longevity. The authors then theorize how and why religion might impact psychological well-being, and review research examining the relationship between religiosity and psychological well-being, purpose and meaning in life, optimism, hope, gratitude, and self-esteem. The chapter concludes by providing recommendations for future research and describing clinical applications for mental health and religious professionals.

Changes in societies and communication technologies are forcing universities and related post-secondary institutions to change quite significantly. Some of these institutions face threats to their existence; many institutions will have to adopt new structures and find new rationales to attract students and faculty. Universities have long relied on academic publishers to provide evaluations of research quality via editorial review, but the publishing industry has gone through tremendous changes and no longer resembles the industry that once provided these evaluations. Neither publishers nor universities have found a clear path toward future relationships. A central issue for researchers is their inability to agree about the quality of research. This disagreement arises partly from the complexity of research and research reports and partly from humans' limitations, and it creates great ambiguity for editorial reviews and personnel reviews. Recognizing the unreliability of evaluations, however, can free researchers to take more control over their professional lives and can make science work better. (HRK / Abstract übernommen).