Skip to main content
Log in

Communism, Universalism and Disinterestedness: Re-examining Contemporary Support among Academics for Merton’s Scientific Norms

  • Published:
Journal of Academic Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript


This paper re-examines the relevance of three academic norms to contemporary academic life – communism, universalism and disinterestedness – based on the work of Robert Merton. The results of a web-based survey elicited responses to a series of value statements and were analysed using the weighted average method and through cross-tabulation. Results indicate strong support for communism as an academic norm defined in relation to sharing research results and teaching materials as opposed to protecting intellectual copyright and withholding access. There is more limited support for universalism based on the belief that academic knowledge should transcend national, political, or religious boundaries. Disinterestedness, defined in terms of personal detachment from truth claims, is the least popular contemporary academic norm. Here, the impact of a performative culture is linked to the need for a large number of academics to align their research interests with funding opportunities. The paper concludes by considering the claims of an alternate set of contemporary academic norms including capitalism, particularism and interestedness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others


  • Berger, P. L., & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality. London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bok, D. (2003). Universities in the marketplace: The commercialisation of higher education. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1989). The corporatism of the universal. The role of intellectuals in the modern world. Telos, 81(Fall), 99–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brew, A. (2001). The nature of research: Inquiry in academic contexts. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1972). The Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Tavistock Publications Translated by A.M. Sheridan Smith.

    Google Scholar 

  • HESA (Higher Education Statistics Agency) (2007) Staff Data Tables, 2005-06, Retrieved 7, December 2006, from

  • Higher Education Academy (2006). The UK Professional Standards Framework for teaching and supporting learning in higher education. York: HEA/SCOP/Universities UK/HEFCW/ Scottish Funding Council/Department for Employment and Learning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, L. (2006). The research game in academic life. Maidenhead: The Society for Research into Higher Education/Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1942). The Normative Structure of Science. In N. Storer (Ed.) The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 267–278). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwen, M. R. (1993). Exiles from Eden: Religion and the academic vocation in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skelton, A. M. (2005). Understanding teaching excellence in higher education: Towards a critical approach. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1919). Science as a vocation. In E. Shils (Ed. and trans.) (1973) Max Weber on universities: The power of the state and the dignity of the academic calling in Imperial Germany (pp. 54–62). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruce Macfarlane.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Macfarlane, B., Cheng, M. Communism, Universalism and Disinterestedness: Re-examining Contemporary Support among Academics for Merton’s Scientific Norms. J Acad Ethics 6, 67–78 (2008).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: