Narrative curriculum vitae (NCVs) have emerged as a key strategy to promote fairer research assessment for funding applications. This project aimed to: a) understand how researchers from underrepresented groups perceive the challenges or opportunities of NCVs and b) examine the language used in NCVs and whether this influences reviewer evaluations.
Study 1, a qualitative interview study with 20 scholars who are minorities in academia (e.g. due to gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, disability), aimed to identify the barriers and facilitators to adopting NCVs using thematic analysis. Study 2 examined how NCVs are written and evaluated, specifically focusing on language. Study 2a, adopts a linguistic analysis of 27 NCVs submitted by minoritised researchers. In Study 2b, 55 reviewers were recruited to evaluate the same 27 NCVs.
Researchers from minoritised groups valued the potential of NCVs but found the different format/writing style challenging and time-consuming, especially in the context of conflicting guidelines and feedback and uncertainty about how NCVs influence funding decisions. Linguistic analysis of NCVs produced by underrepresented/minoritised researchers demonstrated differences in language use across group, including less-frequent use of language indicting agency and ownership, which subsequently was found to influence reviewers' evaluation of these NCVs.
The project is one of the first to consider the perspective of NCV writers who belong to minoritised backgrounds in higher education, integrating their point of view and insights into the language they use and how reviewers assess it.
