Developing a Framework to Explore Local Researchers’ Engagement with Global Academia: The Case of Vietnamese Social Sciences Scholars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, local scholars have been playing an increasingly significant role in the global knowledge system. However, in the context of Vietnam, interaction and engagement between Vietnamese social sciences researchers (VSSRs) with the global academic world are limited despite efforts from the Vietnamese government and tertiary institutions. This study explores the barriers that prevent Vietnamese scholars engaging with the international academic community. Eighty-two Vietnamese scholars in various fields of social sciences responded to an online self-reporting questionnaire including 13 closed-ended and nine open-ended questions. The results show that various individual factors (e.g., the researchers’ inadequate proficiency in English or limited research capacities), organisational factors (e.g., the lack of a supportive research environment, the lack of funding and resources, and unsupportive policies), and broader factors (e.g., political censors or the tradition of social research) could significantly influence VSSRs’ engagement with global academia. The study underlines the need for in-depth scholar-centred research to understand the process in which local researchers, who are disadvantaged by their contextual factors, participate in the international academic community. More importantly, findings are used to develop a potential framework to study local researchers’ academic engagement with global academia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".