COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH AND THE INDIVIDUALIST IDEAL OF HUMANITIES SCHOLARSHIP

Abstract

Since the middle of the 20th century there has been an increased interest in collaborative research amongst scholars in diverse disciplines. institutions and locations. This is principally evidenced by the growth rate of multiply-authored research papers. Beaver and Rosen forecast "the virtual demise of the lone researcher" (1979:237), and Price made his now famous prediction in 1963 that "by 1980 the single author paper will be extinct" (Gordon, 1980:193). Although this prediction has not come to pass and, as Wray posits (2002: 166), is not likely to in the foreseeable future, Avkiran maintains that "collaborative research will probably continue as research content and methodology become more sophisticated, and academic survival becomes more dependent on publishing" (1997:173). This paper interrogates the prevailing assumption that collaborative research is quantitatively and qualitatively superior to individualist research and therefore deserves to be promoted across all disciplines and contexts. By critically indexing some of the studies carried out in the field, the paper observes that collaborative research is both disciplinarily and contextually determined. While it is reported, for instance, to be more suited to researches in the hard and social sciences, it is against the individualist ideal of humanities scholarship; and while it may result in improved research productivity in technologically developed societies, in developing nations, such as Nigeria, it is more likely to diminish research productivity. The paper concludes, however, that where the objective is not strictly for improved research productivity, there are accruable benefits, even to humanists, in research collaboration.