Introduction

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak at the end of 2019 triggered a global pandemic crisis that has significantly changed how people live and work. Moreover, it has transformed the higher education system. The pandemic has not only brought about changes to teaching and learning in universities but also presented new challenges and opportunities for academic research. On the one hand, the COVID-19 pandemic has had some positive impacts, such as advancing research and strengthening transnational research collaboration among researchers, especially in the field of COVID-19 (Abramo et al. 2022; Carvalho et al. 2023). On the other hand, many faculty members have been compelled to work remotely from their homes (Tonnessen et al. 2021). As a result, some of them have experienced stagnation in their research due to laboratory closures (Shamseer et al. 2021). Isolation during the pandemic has also caused many faculty members to experience stress, insecurity, and anxiety (Gordon and Presseau 2023; Shoukat et al. 2021; Suart et al. 2022). Additionally, the pandemic has induced some shifts in the allocation of various types of research resources. For instance, more funding has been directed towards the research field of COVID-19, while research funding in other areas has decreased (Kwan et al. 2022; Shueb et al. 2022). Changes in working patterns and conditions brought about by this pandemic may have a significant impact on the academic performance of faculty members.

This study aims to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faculty members’ academic research performance through a review of the literature from the past three years. A growing body of empirical studies has focused on the impact of the pandemic on research performance across different fields in the past few years (e.g. Abramo et al. 2022; Mukhopadhyay 2023; Myers et al. 2020). However, the conclusions drawn from these studies are not consistent. Some research found that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected faculty members’ work efficiency, leading to a decrease in research output (e.g. Adisa et al. 2021; Bender et al. 2022; Jacobs et al. 2022). In different fields, however, some studies have found that the COVID-19 pandemic has positively affected faculty members’ research output (e.g. Aviv-Reuven and Rosenfeld 2021; Raynaud et al. 2021). Therefore, this study endeavors to contribute to the existing literature by summarizing the differences in the impact of the pandemic on faculty members’ research performance across different fields.

Moreover, there is still a lack of understanding regarding how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected scientific research. The relationship between the pandemic and scientific research is not only a concern in higher education. It also pertains to matters such as gender equality, globalization, and digitalization (Brem et al. 2021; Carvalho et al. 2023; Liu et al. 2022). Therefore, this study adopted a cross-disciplinary perspective to identify the mechanisms through which the pandemic has affected faculty members’ research performance. The results of this study will provide some insights into how to maintain research excellence during times of crisis.

Finally, the paper concludes by presenting some policy implications for university crisis management. Most of the existing studies in this area have primarily focused on institutional leadership and governance structures of universities (McNamara 2021; Oleksiyenko et al. 2023), while the real plight of individuals needs to be better understood. The current study examines the challenges and difficulties experienced by faculty while conducting academic research during a pandemic, which could provide policy implications for managing crises in higher education.

Methodology

This study applied the systematic literature review method to thoroughly examine relevant literature. This is a replicable, scientific, and transparent approach with minimal bias (Denyer and Tranfield 2009). It improves the credibility of research outcomes by establishing clear inclusion criteria and integrating data analysis (Xiao and Watson 2019). Specifically, we employed the “Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses” (PRISMA) framework, an evidence-based, structured guideline developed to aid researchers in conducting and documenting high-quality systematic reviews (Page et al. 2021). This framework guided our screening of eligible articles, as detailed in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

PRISMA flow diagram.

Full size image

Identification: keyword search

To conduct this study, we used specific criteria to search for articles in the Web of Science Core Collection database. Firstly, we began by selecting articles that contain certain keywords relevant to research performance, including “research output”, “research performance”, “research publication”, or “research productivity”. Secondly, we narrowed our focus to research that pertained to the faculty group, with keywords like “faculty”, “faculty members”, “researcher”, or “scholar”, or terms beginning with “acade*”. Thirdly, we ensured that all selected articles included keywords related to the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, “COVID-19” or “pandemic”. Furthermore, we only considered articles published in English from January 1, 2020 to July 1, 2023. Through this procedure, we were able to identify 2,253 unique articles.

Screening: article selection

We organized the literature by relevance and conducted a more thorough screening process according to the following criteria: first, the sample group of the article should be university faculty members; second, the research must have been conducted against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic; third, the research paper should be either an empirical study or a literature review based on empirical evidence; fourth, the paper should be in English.

All articles that did not pertain to faculty members, researchers, or scholars were excluded, resulting in the removal of 1401 articles and leaving a total of 852. Subsequently, we conducted a preliminary screening based on article titles and abstracts, concurrently eliminating non-English language articles. This process led to the exclusion of an additional 618 articles, reducing the total to 234. Then, we proceeded with an in-depth examination and further evaluation of the alignment between the articles and the study’s thematic focus. These two stages resulted in the removal of 190 articles, leaving us with 48. Finally, we checked the references of these 48 articles and conducted a snowball search to identify relevant literature, which led to the discovery of an additional 4 related articles.

Included: quality control

In this study, 52 articles were incorporated, each marked with asterisks in the reference section to denote inclusion. These articles facilitated an examination of the internal mechanisms by which the COVID-19 pandemic influenced faculty members’ research performance. A systematic review process was developed by the first author and reviewed by the second author, who served as the auditor, to pre-specify the objectives and methods of the review, based on Liberati et al. (2009). To ensure the robustness of our findings, we applied the five-dimension assessment method proposed by Connolly et al. (2012). This method evaluates the appropriateness of the research design for addressing the research questions, the appropriateness of the methods and analysis, the generalizability of findings, their relevance to the study’s focus areas, and the credibility of the results. All selected articles met these stringent criteria, affirming their suitability for a comprehensive analysis of the pandemic’s impact on academic research.

Bibliometric analysis

In the past three years, the number of papers on the impact of the pandemic on scientific performance has increased by an average of about three times per year as COVID-19 has spread.

Medical journals dominate publications on the pandemic’s impact on research performance

In terms of disciplinary distribution, 11 articles were published in medical journals (21%), 7 in educational journals (13%), and another 7 in information science journals (13%). The remaining articles are published in general journals that cover multiple disciplines, as well as computer science and management journals (see Fig. 2). These articles are most frequently published in medical journals, indicating a higher level of research attention on the impact of the pandemic on research performance within the medical field.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Discipline categories of the articles.

Full size image

Gender differences in the impact of the pandemic on faculty research are gaining major attention

As for citation count, as of July 1, 2023, 6 articles (12%) had been cited more than 100 times, and 12 articles (24%) had been cited more than 30 times. The three most frequently cited articles, both with more than 200 citations, are Myers et al.’s (2020) paper on changes in research time for female scientists during the COVID-19 pandemic (634 citations), Cui et al.’s (2022) publication on gender inequality in research output during the COVID-19 pandemic (257 citations), and Krukowski et al.’s (2021) study on the research output of faculty members of different genders in STEM and medical disciplines during the COVID-19 pandemic (236 citations) (see Fig. 3). The themes of the highly cited articles reveal that gender differences in the impact of the pandemic on the research performance of university faculty have received more attention.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Citation count of the articles.

Full size image

North American authors lead in research on the pandemic’s impact on research performance

In terms of the geographic distribution of the first authors, there are 27 authors from North America (52%), 10 from Asia (19%), 8 from Europe (15%), and 7 from other continents (14%), indicating that authors from North America are the primary contributors of articles on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on research performance (see Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Distribution of the first author’s country.

Full size image

An overview of the COVID-19 pandemic on research performance

Although the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific research performance has garnered substantial attention in the past three years, research findings have been inconsistent. The effects of the pandemic vary based on disciplinary and gender differences, as outlined below.

Disciplinary differences in the impact of the pandemic

An overwhelming majority of the literature illustrates a dichotomy in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on academic publications. In the medical fields most relevant to COVID-19, researchers have observed a rapid escalation in the number of articles published in top-tier journals since the pandemic’s onset (Raynaud et al. 2021). A study by Aviv-Reuven and Rosenfeld (2021) found a surge in the number of research outputs relevant to the COVID-19 pandemic within the first six months of its emergence, mainly in the publication of COVID-19-related articles. Academic journals have exhibited a noticeably accelerated acceptance rate for articles focusing on COVID-19, often at the expense of a reduced volume of non-COVID-19-related publications.

Research shows that the number of academic publications is positively correlated with the number of COVID-19 infections (Ali 2022; Grammes et al. 2020). However, there are still some exceptions. Some literature suggests that certain nations, such as Italy and Iran, which have been hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic, have published fewer articles (Dehghanbanadaki et al. 2020). Arora et al. (2021) explained that the shortage of research does not result from a deficiency in research culture or appropriate academic institutions, but rather due to the strain placed on local medical institutions and practitioners by the rapid disease outbreaks. Consequently, researchers found themselves devoting most of their time to providing patient care, leaving them with little time to focus on publishing research.

While the pandemic generally has positively influenced COVID-19-related studies, a detrimental effect has been observed on research output unrelated to the pandemic (Delardas and Giannos 2022). This adverse impact is reflected not simply in the decreased volume of publications, but also in their quality (Yang and Li 2023). It is found that the academic output in engineering, computer science, and social science has most notably decreased (Haghani et al. 2022).

Gender differences in the impact of the pandemic

In addition to disciplinary differences, most of the literature examined the gender difference in the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on scientific research performance, and found that male researchers demonstrated higher scientific research productivity during the COVID-19 pandemic than their female counterparts (Liu et al. 2022; Peetz et al. 2023; Rego et al. 2023), and there has been a decrease in the number of female first authors in scientific research since the pandemic began. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, this gender gap was gradually narrowing. However, since the outbreak of the pandemic, the number of publications by males has significantly exceeded that of females, resulting in a wider gap (Lerchenmüller et al. 2021; Madsen et al. 2022). In France, the Netherlands, and Switzerland, females’ output levels have declined more than males’ (Abramo et al. 2022). That’s because female researchers may face greater challenges than their male counterparts with household chores and childcare responsibilities (Ucar et al. 2022). This phenomenon is particularly noticeable among female scientists in their careers’ early stages (Krukowski et al. 2021). Thus, gender inequality in academic publications has worsened during the COVID-19 pandemic (Kwon et al. 2023).

The adverse effects of the pandemic on female faculty members’ research performance vary across different countries. Abramo et al. (2022) found that in the United States and China, the research output of female and male scholars has decreased at a similar rate. In Germany and Spain, male researchers have experienced a higher decline in research output than their female counterparts. In countries such as Italy, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, gender differences in research output are barely noticeable. Buckman et al.’s (2023) research revealed that although the number of academic publications published by females has increased more than that of males after the outbreak of COVID-19, in many other academic activity indicators, such as Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved protocols, and extramural funding submissions, females and males have reached the same level.

The mechanisms underlying the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on research performance

There has been less exploration in the existing literature on the internal mechanisms by which the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted university faculty members’ scientific research performance. A review and summary of related research revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected faculty members’ work modes, research collaboration behaviors, and research resources. As a result, the following possible influencing mechanisms are identified.

Shift in working mode

COVID-19 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization in March 2020. Almost overnight, governments worldwide initiated lockdowns and new regulations to minimize the spread of the virus and protect the population (Mahase 2020). This has made work-from-home (WFH) the primary academic workstyle during the pandemic.

WFH offers faculty members flexible work arrangements without physical space or time constraints. Nonetheless, WFH still has some limitations, including unguaranteed working hours, poor team communication, distractions, emotional anxiety, and reduced work efficiency (Adisa et al. 2021). Boundary theory suggests that WFH can result in work-family overlap, role conflicts, and the collapse of boundaries that protect researchers from overwork and related health issues (Clark 2000). Home is not an ideal place for deep work. Faculty members may face various challenges when completing tasks at home, including noise, poor lighting, insufficient internet speed, difficulty adapting to new technologies, and distractions from family members (Nayak et al. 2023). Therefore, it is impossible to maintain the same level of academic productivity working from home as in the office. Numerous existing studies have extensively explored the following three aspects of WFH’s impact on research performance.

Changes in research time

During the COVID-19 pandemic, studies have found that the overall working hours have increased. For instance, Adisa et al.’s study (2021) shows that the average commuting time for American scholars on workdays is roughly one hour. During WFH, the time spent on commuting could be saved and reinvested into research, effectively extending faculty members’ research time. However, not all this increment in working hours has translated into improved research productivity (Adekola et al. 2022). According to most studies, the pandemic has curtailed faculty members’ effective research time (Turner-McGrievy et al. 2021). One’s attention is easily distracted during the WFH, making it almost impossible to maintain previous work efficiency (Bender et al. 2022; Esquivel et al. 2023). Furthermore, during the pandemic, the affairs of faculty members have not decreased but increased, and the increased workload has placed an additional burden on faculty (Hanna et al. 2022).

Myers et al. (2020) surveyed 4535 European and American scientists, and found that their total work hours were reduced by 11%, with a 24% decrease in research time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Across different disciplines, experimental-oriented fields, such as biochemistry and chemical engineering, witnessed the most significant decline in research time, with 30–40% reductions compared to the pre-pandemic levels. On the other hand, non-experimental fields like mathematics, computer science, and economics experienced comparatively smaller declines in research time. However, social sciences presented a divergent scenario. Cui et al. (2022) studied researchers in the American social science realm and found that during the work-from-home period of the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty members’ research time increased, leading to a 35% rise in academic publications.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a more significant impact on female faculty’s time than male faculty, as family responsibilities have taken up more of females’ research time (Manchester et al. 2023; Pebdani et al. 2023; Walters et al. 2022). During the COVID-19 pandemic, female scholars had 5% less research time than their male counterparts under otherwise equivalent conditions. For scientists with at least one child aged five years or below, research time decreased by as much as 17% (Myers et al. 2020). Women are taking time off from work to care for children more frequently than men (Kasymova et al. 2021; King and Frederickson 2021; Pereira 2021; Plaunova et al. 2021). This can be attributed to traditional gender roles that expect women to take on the primary responsibility of childcare (Ipe et al. 2021). Meanwhile, females’ household chores have significantly increased due to the pandemic lockdown. Female researchers spend 8.3 more hours per week on household chores than male researchers (Ellinas et al. 2022). In even the Nordic gender-equal countries, females are responsible for nearly two-thirds of domestic work (European Commission 2016), which negatively impacts female faculty research (Kotini-Shah et al. 2022; Mukhopadhyay 2023; Shalaby et al. 2021).

Psychological problems

The COVID-19 pandemic has also influenced the psychological state of researchers, ultimately affecting faculty members’ research efficiency. Studies have shown that coping with Covid-19-induced prolonged WFH or isolation may lead to psychological trauma for faculty members (Andrade 2020), mainly manifested as anger (Brooks et al. 2020), depression (Shorey et al. 2021), loneliness (Goncalves et al. 2020), heightened alertness (Pérez et al. 2020), and an increased risk of suicide (Fitzpatrick et al. 2020). A study by Akyildiz and Durna (2021) used the COVID-19 Anxiety Scale to examine 290 Turkish scholars and found that female and young scholars experienced the highest level of anxiety, which has a negative impact not only on their scientific performance but also on their well-being (Kliment et al. 2021). This trend is not limited to Turkey but is also evident in countries like Iran, Nigeria, and the US (Hosseinzadeh et al. 2020; Rakhmanov et al. 2020; Thiria et al. 2022). The anxiety associated with working from home is not necessarily less for faculty with families. Due to lengthened time spent at home during the lockdown, conflicts between parents and children may increase, exacerbating faculty’s anxiety levels (Gordon and Presseau 2023; Suart et al. 2022).

Maladaptation to new technologies

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has promoted the progress and development of online education technology. Due to the pandemic’s impact, colleges and universities are forced to innovate and adapt. The lockdown caused by the pandemic has catalyzed the rise of distance education and other technologies (Chandra et al. 2020). These technologies have played a vital role in crucial institutions affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and thus their application and innovation have accelerated significantly during the COVID-19 pandemic (Afrianty et al. 2022; Brem et al. 2021).

Studies on faculty members in Indian universities have shown that online teaching negatively correlates with their research output. Online teaching requires faculty members to master the technical tools necessary for online courses. Nonetheless, some faculty members are reluctant to use and embrace technology, and their lack of technology acceptance adversely impacts their research productivity (Nayak et al. 2023). Older and more experienced faculty members have suffered to a greater extent from the adverse effects of technology during the pandemic lockdown (Penado et al. 2021). Meanwhile, faculty members’ use of information and communication technology and network software in online education creates technical stress and teaching fatigue, which will inhibit the growth of scientific research output (Dahabiyeh et al. 2022; De Souza et al. 2023).

Changes in research collaboration

The social and emotional connections among coauthors can enhance academics’ work efficiency. As Durkheim puts it, “collective effervescence” strengthens the feeling of solidarity among individuals (Mackie et al. 2008). However, during WFH of the COVID-19 pandemic, domestic research collaboration, especially collaboration that requires face-to-face interaction with colleagues, becomes almost impossible, let alone international research collaboration.

In the research fields related to COVID-19, due to the urgent need for epidemic control and the difficulty in conducting research during the COVID-19 pandemic, more and more scientists were conducting collaborative research (Carvalho et al. 2023). Studies have shown that the pandemic has positively impacted intra-country collaboration (Abramo et al. 2022). Nevertheless, some countries lack the resources and means to respond effectively and promptly to the COVID-19 pandemic, which makes it challenging to promote research on the pandemic through individual or national efforts (Fry et al. 2020). This has spawned collaborations between countries, organizations, and individuals, with the number of international collaborations gradually increasing (Naidoo et al. 2022). Research indicates that international research collaboration not only offers opportunities to access resources from other countries (Zhao et al. 2013), but also facilitates the development of complementary capabilities among researchers (Wagner and Leydesdorff 2005). This represents a significant approach to enhancing faculty members’ academic productivity and research impact.

The research collaboration pattern in COVID-19 features a clear center-periphery structure. Kim and Cho (2021) conducted a study based on COVID-19-related papers indexed in the Scopus database in 2020. They found that collaborations between two countries resulted in 64.3% of publications, while those involving three countries accounted for 18.3%, and four or more countries contributed 17.4% (see Fig. 5). This indicates that most COVID-19-related research is carried out through collaborations among a few countries, often following a small-scale elite model, a model of collaboration that can quickly improve research performance. Moreover, these collaborative efforts are primarily driven by countries that the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted (Abramo et al. 2022). Such collaborative behaviors primarily occur within disciplines related to COVID-19. This phenomenon might stem from increased complexities in international collaboration due to physical and political barriers (Aviv-Reuven and Rosenfeld 2021), high coordination costs associated with international collaboration (Fry et al. 2020), and reduced time available for research (Myers et al. 2020). Moreover, the urgency of the pandemic necessitates smaller, more familiar teams capable of rapidly accomplishing tasks (Cai et al. 2021). Larger teams tend to incur higher transaction costs in communication, data sharing, testing, and article writing. Whereas smaller teams can mitigate communication costs, allowing research to proceed quickly.

Fig. 5
figure 5

Distribution of the research collaboration modes.

Full size image

The impact of the pandemic on international research collaboration in non-COVID-19 fields is still unclear. Lee and Haupt (2021) found through Scopus data that between January and May 2020, the proportion of international collaboration in non-COVID-19 areas was 27.88%, 5.7% lower than that in COVID-19-related articles published in the same period. He et al. (2021) used paper data from ArXiv and found that international collaborative research in 2020 decreased by 1.55% compared to the previous year, but it recovered after May. Gao and his colleagues (2021) found that the number of new co-authors in non-COVID-19-related papers in 2020 decreased by 5% compared to 2019.

Adjustment in research resources

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the availability of competitive resources for faculty members, including research funding. To address the challenges posed by the pandemic, governments worldwide have strategically allocated limited resources, including funding, supplies, and personnel, primarily towards public health services related to the COVID-19 pandemic, vaccine development, and epidemic prevention (Salmon et al. 2021). This has resulted in increased research resources dedicated to these specific domains.

In other academic fields unrelated to COVID-19, however, the disruptive effects of the pandemic and the ensuing financial difficulties faced by multiple countries have led to significant reductions in traditional funding allocations (Coyne et al. 2020). This has affected the financial standing of both academic institutions and researchers (Estermann et al. 2020).

Ellie Bothwell (2020), a funding and public policy expert at the European University Association, pointed out that the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on university finance would last for more than ten years, and the resulting global recession would be more challenging than the 2008 financial crisis. Universities need funding to address pandemic-related challenges; however, the pandemic has led to reduced student enrollments, resulting in decreased tuition revenue for some Western institutions (Estermann et al. 2020). The resulting financial strain on universities can, in turn, influence the research funding of faculty members. Adequate funding serves as a cornerstone for sustaining faculty members’ ongoing research, while insufficiencies in funding may lead to declines in research output (Kwan et al. 2022; Shueb et al. 2022).

Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in restrictions in research areas, scarcity of resources for scientific research, and reduced conference attendance across regions, all affecting academic output (Sezen-Barrie et al. 2023). This has had a severe impact on female researchers and those in the science and engineering disciplines (Shamseer et al. 2021). Due to the financial deficit caused by the pandemic, several universities have resorted to large-scale layoffs. In the United States, universities have taken measures such as suspending recruitment, offering early retirement to employees, and implementing salary cuts for core management to balance their budgets (Watermeyer et al. 2021). For faculty members, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to uncertainty in project funding and instability in employment, which will adversely impact the future academic careers of young faculty in particular.

Conclusion and implications

Conclusion

A review of the existing literature found that the COVID-19 pandemic has promoted academic productivity in the field of COVID-19, while non-COVID-19-related academic output displays a downward trend. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a more significant negative impact on the scientific research performance of female faculty than males. According to the existing literature, there are three possible pathways through which the COVID-19 pandemic may have affected faculty members’ research performance, shifts in working modes, changes in research collaboration, and adjustments in research resources (see Fig. 6).

Fig. 6
figure 6

The impact mechanisms of the COVID-19 pandemic on research performance.

Full size image

Firstly, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, faculty members have shifted their working mode from on-site to work from home (WFH). Some researchers in experimental-intensive disciplines have been confronted with job disruption and reduced working hours as a result of the lockdown policy of the COVID-19 pandemic (Myers et al. 2020). Family affairs may have also taken up scientific research time. Moreover, since the home is not an ideal workplace, faculty members may experience depression and loss of work efficiency while WFH (Bender et al. 2022; Shorey et al. 2021). In addition to changes in work hours, WFH for a long time without being able to go out may lead to multiple psychological problems such as anger, frustration, loneliness, and heightened vigilance (Brooks et al. 2020; Pérez et al. 2020). Furthermore, setting up a home office not only entails reliable network facilities, but also requires a high level of information technology proficiency, which can pose great challenges to some faculty members (Penado et al. 2021).

Secondly, in COVID-19-related fields, the pandemic has increased the proportion of international collaboration among scientific researchers, and altered the structure of scientific research collaboration. This transformation has led to smaller-scale and more focused elite collaborations. However, in non-COVID-19 fields, the number of scientific research collaborations has decreased.

Thirdly, to effectively combat the COVID-19 pandemic, the nation and universities must allocate resources toward research related to COVID-19. This may, in turn, result in a need for more resources, such as funding, for researchers in non-COVID-19-related fields.

Implications for future research

Existing literature has made some progress in studying the relationship between the COVID-19 pandemic and faculty members’ research performance. Most of these studies are empirical studies based on bibliometrics, questionnaires and interviews, describing and analyzing the changes in scientific performance during the pandemic and the factors influencing it. However, the existing literature still has the following deficiencies that require further research and discussion:

International and interdisciplinary research collaborations in the post-epidemic era

One of the most profound impacts of the pandemic has been on research collaborations and knowledge dissemination, especially in the realm of international research exchanges and conferences (Fry et al. 2020; Aviv-Reuven and Rosenfeld 2021). The shift to virtual platforms for academic conferences and workshops has created new opportunities for global collaboration while removing geographical barriers (Afrianty et al. 2022; Brem et al. 2021). However, the long-term effects of these changes on the quality of academic exchanges and the global flow of research knowledge remain unclear. The pandemic has also accelerated technology transfer and interdisciplinary development, particularly in fields like biomedical sciences, where the urgency of COVID-19 research has led to a more rapid translation of research findings into real-world applications. This is an area that deserves further exploration, especially in understanding how interdisciplinary integration can promote the generation and application of new knowledge in the post-pandemic era.

The mechanisms through which COVID-19 affects research performance by changing the working mode

While existing literature discusses the pandemic’s impact on researchers’ work-from-home (WFH) arrangements, collaborative behaviors, and research resources (e.g., Adekola et al. 2022; Fry et al. 2020; Shueb et al. 2022), the specific mechanisms through which these factors influence research performance remain unclear and require further investigation. Future studies should focus on understanding the underlying mechanisms, such as how new technologies and remote work practices reshape individual work styles, efficiency, and interpersonal interactions. For example, remote work can alter how researchers manage their time and prioritize tasks, potentially enhancing productivity, but it may also pose challenges to collaboration and communication. Understanding how these mechanisms influence research innovation and performance, both in terms of quantity and quality, is essential for adapting research practices in the post-pandemic era.

Shifts in research paradigms and international differences in post-pandemic era

As the COVID-19 pandemic gradually subsides, the global academic community has undergone profound changes, particularly in research paradigms, work modes, and international collaboration patterns. Post-pandemic research will need to explore the long-term impacts of the pandemic on academic output, research practices, and international collaborations across different countries and regions. In particular, the differences in pandemic response strategies, research resource allocation, and the impact on scholars may lead to significant variations in research performance across countries. Future studies can focus on how these international differences shape the global research ecosystem, examining how to rebuild a more equitable, collaborative, and efficient research system in the post-pandemic era.

The development of higher education theories for crisis response

The pandemic’s effect on faculty research performance sheds light on how higher education research operates during a crisis. However, existing research is primarily based on empirical evidence, and there is still a shortage of theoretical discussions in this field. To better explain the characteristics of scientific research innovation in universities during crises, it is necessary to develop more higher education theoretical perspectives or viewpoints from other disciplines in the future.

Implications for management practice

By reviewing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on faculty members’ research performance, this paper provides insights into the management of university research after a crisis.

First, university hiring systems should be adjusted with greater flexibility in response to the unique challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. Most research results indicate that the COVID-19 pandemic has affected gender equity (e.g., Cui et al. 2022; Krukowski et al. 2021). Therefore, it is recommended that attention should be paid to the gender differences of faculty members in the post-pandemic phase, and that more support should be afforded to female researchers, especially those who are in the early years of child care (Davis et al. 2022; Plaunova et al. 2021). For example, universities should consider extending tenure durations for female faculty members who were disproportionately affected by caregiving responsibilities or other pandemic-related challenges. Certain institutions, such as Stanford University (2020) and the University of Washington (2020), have already implemented measures to extend tenure during the pandemic, allowing academic staff additional time (e.g., one year) to meet their obligatory promotion or advancement criteria (Tso and Parikh 2021). For smaller institutions with fewer resources, collaborative models can be adopted by partnering with local governments, industry associations, or charitable organizations to secure external funding specifically for tenure clock extensions (Messersmith et al. 2021). Additionally, collaborating with neighboring universities to share resources and jointly develop tenure extension policies can distribute the workload and reduce individual institutional strain through collaboration.

Universities should extend the tenure of faculty members in the workplace. Additionally, at home, they should continue to provide long-term childcare support for female faculty members affected by the pandemic. It is important to recognize that these challenges are not confined to the crisis period but may persist into the post-pandemic era. For instance, the University of Chicago’s virtual nanny program, which employs professional students to assist with childcare, could be expanded and institutionalized to provide ongoing support for faculty members balancing work and family responsibilities beyond the pandemic (Flaherty 2020). For smaller institutions with fewer resources, the collaborative model exemplified by Italy’s Smart Mum project can be adapted to integrate resources within the university or other universities in the region (Manzo and Minello 2020). By establishing online support platforms, such as regular Zoom meetings, universities can create digital spaces where mothers can exchange childcare experiences, share resources, and alleviate stress. This model not only helps mothers maintain emotional connections during times of crisis and isolation but also enhances their childcare skills and knowledge. Moreover, universities can collaborate with local childcare providers to offer flexible and affordable childcare solutions. Such initiatives not only facilitate work-life balance but also demonstrate a commitment to nurturing a supportive academic environment, which is essential for helping female faculty maintain their research productivity and career progression in the aftermath of the pandemic.

Second, offering technical guidance and psychological support to faculty engaged in remote online work remains essential after the pandemic. The outbreak of COVID-19 accelerated the advancement of information technology, and while online work continues to offer benefits such as flexibility and increased efficiency, the absence of face-to-face interaction has intensified pressures related to online communication and empathy (Sonnenberg 2021). The study by Mastell-Freedy (2023) indicates that the provision of mental health support and technological resources during the pandemic played a positive role in alleviating stress and reducing intentions to leave. After the pandemic, university administrators should continue to provide strong support for remote work arrangements, ensuring that faculty have the necessary resources to adapt to a combination of online and offline teaching and research modes and to work effectively in an increasingly digital environment. Moreover, as a response to the ongoing challenges of remote work, policymakers in the university should focus on improving working conditions, including long-term investments in mental health support, healthcare resources, and positive guidance to sustain faculty morale and productivity in the years ahead (Molino et al. 2016).

Moreover, universities should align these technical and psychological support measures with tenure and childcare policies, ensuring that faculty members who are balancing remote work with caregiving or other personal responsibilities are given the appropriate tools and mental health resources to thrive.

Third, it is important to strengthen research collaboration after the pandemic. Although the COVID-19 pandemic initially hindered globalization and inter-state exchanges, studies indicate that research collaboration enhances mutual support and resource sharing among scholars, thereby improving the quality and impact of research outcomes (Lee and Bozeman 2005). In the post-pandemic context, universities and governments should prioritize the rebuilding and expansion of international collaborations that may have been disrupted. It is crucial to enhance the level of international scientific collaboration through joint projects and expanding collaborative scopes. Encouraging scholars to participate in global exchanges and develop international discourse competence remains essential (Cao et al. 2022). Moreover, diversifying collaboration models, such as promoting online seminars and virtual conferences, can continue to play a pivotal role in overcoming geographical and physical barriers, optimizing the allocation of research resources, and facilitating the rapid dissemination of knowledge (Raby and Madden 2021).

Finally, it is essential to focus on the dynamic allocation of research resources in the post-pandemic era. Research has shown that knowledge forms the foundation for understanding and addressing global crises (Shueb et al. 2022). During the pandemic, institutions such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and universities in the United States restructured their research resources, significantly increasing funding for pandemic-related studies (Subbaraman 2021). This dynamic and flexible resource allocation approach can be applied beyond the COVID-19 crisis. Similar strategies could be employed in response to other global crises such as natural disasters, climate change, economic recessions or future pandemics. By designing adaptable frameworks, universities and institutions can quickly reallocate resources in times of crisis, ensuring that the most pressing research needs are met in real time. Such frameworks should include dedicated funding management units to streamline resource allocation, ensuring that financial support swiftly addresses the most urgent needs. In addition, universities should establish dedicated emergency management teams to oversee crisis response efforts and ensure the effective distribution of resources (Song et al. 2022). In these situations, clear mechanisms for evaluating and selecting relevant research are critical. This may involve rapid review processes for research proposals, where academic experts and policymakers collaborate to assess feasibility and urgency. Furthermore, institutions can establish platforms to accelerate the application and deployment of research outcomes, ensuring that findings are quickly translated into real-world solutions (Moerschell and Novak 2020). For example, during natural disasters like hurricanes or wildfires, universities like the University of California system have implemented flexible funding models to support affected faculty and expedite research related to disaster mitigation and recovery (UCLA 2025).

Going forward, universities should ensure that resource allocation remains highly flexible and adaptive. For instance, at the start of the crisis, there was an enhanced allocation of resources towards solution-oriented initiatives. As the crisis gradually winds down, universities should shift their research priorities toward examining the long-term impacts of the crisis, including its effects on mental health, education, and social systems. This reallocation will enable institutions to better prepare for future crises while maintaining a strong focus on addressing the enduring challenges posed by the crisis (Zeng et al. 2023).

In summary, the effectiveness of the proposed management policies can be evaluated by assessing specific indicators that reflect the impact on faculty members before and after the crisis. Key success metrics should include research productivity, faculty members retention rates, funding acquisition, international collaboration, and faculty members’ satisfaction. These indicators provide concrete methods for measuring the outcomes of various policy initiatives. For instance, the effectiveness of gender equity support can be monitored by tracking faculty members’ retention rates among female faculty members. The impact of mental health and remote work support can be evaluated through faculty members’ satisfaction with work-life balance. Changes in research collaboration can be reflected in the number of international projects and partnerships. Additionally, the dynamic allocation of research resources can be assessed by evaluating both the speed of resource reallocation and faculty research performance. This involves tracking the time taken to reallocate resources in response to urgent needs, such as funding or personnel changes, as well as measuring research productivity through the number of publications, research projects, or patents related to the crisis produced during the crisis period. These indicators can serve as tools to assess the effectiveness of the above initiatives.

Limitations

Several limitations should be acknowledged: Although this review identified 52 articles that addressed changes in faculty research performance during the COVID-19 pandemic, the focus was primarily on shifts in research collaboration, allocation of resources, and changes in research focus. Research activities in other areas such as detailed lab work interruptions and long-term career impacts on junior faculty were less represented. The insights into these facets might be underexplored due to the selected article pool, which could limit the comprehensiveness of our conclusions.

Additionally, the articles reviewed were published between January 2020 and July 2023. As the pandemic and its impacts continue to evolve, some of the later consequences and adaptations may not be fully captured in this study. These are all areas that require further research.