The Impact of Transnational Postdoctoral Mobility on Chinese Scientists’ International Research Collaboration and Early-career Development

• In Event: Global and Comparative Perspectives on STEM Education and Research

Proposal

Research Purpose
With fierce competition for elite academic appointments in many countries, some PhD graduates strive to distinguish themselves through transnational postdoctoral mobility (Sautier, 2021). A recent study found that early-career scholars’ accumulated social capital, particularly academic networks developed through international mobility, is crucial for career success (Courtois & O’ Keefe, 2024). Postdoctoral experience helps PhD graduates gain visibility in the global science community and build international research collaboration networks (Horta, 2009). These connections made during the transnational postdoc mobility often hold into scholars’ later academic careers and lead to research collaborations and co-publications (Melin, 2004), which brings advantages for their career development.

China, a leading country producer of doctorates and a major source of international postdocs (Cantwell, 2011), has witnessed a significant growth in its scientific research infrastructure and academic internationalization over recent decades. However, a transnational postdoc experience no longer guarantees a successful domestic academic career (Li & Shen, 2024). As such, it is essential to understand the reward mechanism of transnational postdoctoral mobility on scholars’ career development in this newly developed situation by answering: Do international collaboration networks built during postdoctoral research prominently facilitate early-career academic development? What are scholars’ motivations and strategies for mobilizing these connections?

As the global science community becomes more interconnected through digital technology, scholars may develop new practices to strengthen their collaborations beyond face-to-face interactions in this hyper-connected environment. This research aligns with the CIES 2025 theme by exploring scholars’ technology-enhanced international collaboration behaviour, which may assist them in overcoming time and space constraints and reducing collaboration costs.

Theoretical Framework
This study draws on three theoretical frameworks.

Social capital theory emphasizes the value of resources, knowledge, opportunities, and social trust gain through social networks (Bourdieu, 1986). It recognizes the importance of social connections in shaping individual and collective outcomes and provides insights into the value of exchanging resources and support in the international research collaboration network for scholars’ professional development.

Weak tie theory suggests that ties in social networks are categorized by their strength (Granovetter, 1973). Strong ties refer to close connections with a higher level of reciprocity, while weak ties offer diverse, non-redundant information. This theory helps examine how various collaboration ties that scholars build through their postdocs influence their early-career development.

Structure hole theory proposed that an actor's position in the network is more influential than the strength of the relationship (Burt, 1992). The position in the network determines the actors’ information, resources, and power. Therefore, regardless of the strength of the relationship, the structure hole, which connects two actors that are not directly connected, has an information advantage so that it can provide more benefits for itself. This theory can be valuable in elaborating why some actors are more vital in the scholars' networks.

Methodology and data source
This research draws on the case of six early-career Chinese scientists with domestic PhD training and international postdoctoral experience. The methodology underwent three phases:

Firstly, the participants’ CVs were collected from institutional or personal lab websites. Participants’ education and career trajectories from PhD to 2023 were recorded, including details such as age, gender, discipline, postdoc experience, duration of postdoc, hosting country, etc. Then, their international collaboration publication in the Web of Science (Article, Review, and Proceeding papers) were cataloged for Social Network Analysis (SNA).

Secondly, SNA was applied to visualize each participant's international collaboration co-authorship ego-networks through their education and career stages since PhD . UCINET software (Borgatti et al., 2002) was utilized to visualize and analyze participants’ international collaboration and co-authorship networks. Coauthor’s degree centrality was assessed and connections established during postdoctoral periods were highlighted for detail analysis.

Finally, semi-structured interviews gathered insights on how postdoctoral mobility impacts early-career development. This included examining the role of collaborators from postdoc experience and how these ties evolved over time (e.g., strengthened, weakened, or vanished).

Preliminary Conclusion
Firstly, scholars with international postdoctoral experience established relationships with numerous international collaborators during their postdoctoral period. These international research collaborations often persist into their early academic careers as part of their transferable academic capital, aiding in the development of their academic reputations and the creation of new collaboration opportunities.

Secondly, postdoctoral mentors serve as crucial structural holes, helping scholars bridge a wide range of weak ties within the international research community. These weak ties can be transferred to their key collaborators and support their professional development upon returning to their home country. Postdoctoral peer fellows, considered as strong ties, typically hold high degree of centrality in the scholars’ ego-network and play a vital role in the international collaboration process.


Reference
Bourdieu, P. (1986), The forms of social capital, In Richardson, J. G. ed., Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education New York, Greenwood.
Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C. (2002). Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes - the social structure of competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cantwell, B. (2011). Transnational mobility and international academic employment: Gatekeeping in an academic competition arena. Minerva, 49, 425-445.
Courtois, A., & O’Keefe, T. (2024). Go away and make a big thing of yourself somewhere else: precarious mobilities and the uses of international capital in Irish academia. Higher Education, 1-17.
Granovetter, M.S. (1973), The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, 78, No.6, pp.1360-1380.
Horta, H. (2009). Holding a post-doctoral position before becoming a faculty member: does it bring benefits for the scholarly enterprise?. Higher Education, 58(5), 689-721.
Li, L., & Shen, W. (2024). Being internationally mobile while keeping domestic social capital: how postdocs from China manage precarity. Science and Public Policy, scae047.
Melin, G. (2004) Postdoc Abroad: Inherited Scientific Contacts or Establishment of New Networks?, Research Evaluation, 13: 95–102.
Sautier, M. (2021) Move or Perish? Sticky Mobilities in the Swiss Academic Context, Higher Education, 82: 799–822.

Author

• Kexin ZHANG, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Graduate School of Education