A cross-country configurational approach to international academic mobility: exploring mobility effects on academics’ career progression in EU countries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study takes a novel perspective on mobility as career script compliance to explore the factors that might influence how mobile academics in a country perceive the impact of international mobility on their overall academic career progression and job options. We conduct a country-level qualitative comparative analysis on a sample of 24 European Union (EU) countries, based on data from European Commission’s MORE3 indicator tool. We find that these perceptions about the impact are shaped by the dominant patterns of mobility in that country, and the general perception of academics in that particular country that international mobility is rewarded in the institutional promotion schemes. This study introduces new explanatory factors for the career script for international mobility. In so doing, we provide a richer understanding of how countries might influence academics’ mobility, which sheds light on previous inconclusive empirical evidence linking international mobility and academics’ careers. Our findings have implications for the policy design of international mobility and open up new lines of inquiry for cross-country comparisons.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it