Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231164926
I. Turina
Sociological studies on imitation and crowds usually point to the late nineteenth-century French jurist and sociologist Gabriel Tarde as their forerunner. This article argues that a lively debate on those issues already existed in Europe in the late seventeenth century. A review of works by Hobbes, Spinoza, Malebranche and Locke will show how they commented upon the dangerous influence of charismatic leaders over excitable mobs or the ordinary occurrence of someone’s opinions or manners being subsequently imitated by others until they become a new fashion. These four authors developed distinct approaches to the study of imitation and crowds. I call them the ‘authoritarian’ (Hobbes), the ‘rationalist’ (Malebranche), the ‘affective’ (Spinoza) and the ‘liberal’ (Locke) frames. The authoritarian and the rationalist approaches easily lead to dismissive or hostile views, while the affective and the liberal ones may open the way to more sympathetic (or at least practical) assessments. This study aims to show that: a) early modern discussions on imitation and crowds made a significant contribution to the formation of the field of social sciences; and b) these classical authors may still prove valuable for understanding imitation and crowds in the twenty-first century, in regard to the digital environment as well.
{"title":"Tarde’s ancestors. Imitation and crowds from Hobbes to Locke","authors":"I. Turina","doi":"10.1177/05390184231164926","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231164926","url":null,"abstract":"Sociological studies on imitation and crowds usually point to the late nineteenth-century French jurist and sociologist Gabriel Tarde as their forerunner. This article argues that a lively debate on those issues already existed in Europe in the late seventeenth century. A review of works by Hobbes, Spinoza, Malebranche and Locke will show how they commented upon the dangerous influence of charismatic leaders over excitable mobs or the ordinary occurrence of someone’s opinions or manners being subsequently imitated by others until they become a new fashion. These four authors developed distinct approaches to the study of imitation and crowds. I call them the ‘authoritarian’ (Hobbes), the ‘rationalist’ (Malebranche), the ‘affective’ (Spinoza) and the ‘liberal’ (Locke) frames. The authoritarian and the rationalist approaches easily lead to dismissive or hostile views, while the affective and the liberal ones may open the way to more sympathetic (or at least practical) assessments. This study aims to show that: a) early modern discussions on imitation and crowds made a significant contribution to the formation of the field of social sciences; and b) these classical authors may still prove valuable for understanding imitation and crowds in the twenty-first century, in regard to the digital environment as well.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"62 1","pages":"31 - 49"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49549650","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231164558
Jeremie Brugidou, Julien Beauté, Jeanne Etelain, Anne-Sofie Dichman, Gregorio Paz Iriarte, Dai Li
We are a group of young researchers in environmental humanities gathered under the label ‘Pirate Laboratory’ at the ENS Ulm. It is within this framework that we have taken a keen interest in the stimulating digital project: Feral Atlas. The More-Than-Human Anthropocene. In order to make the Feral Atlas visible and understandable, we collectively wrote a creative text, based on narrative entanglements. It would seem that the experience of digital ethnography proposed by the Feral Atlas is, by its very form and structure, a kind of response, a proposal of what ferality can be. We would like to approach this ferality by presenting our crossed field experiences on the Atlas, in a way that is as unconventional as the interface itself. The stake is thus both to make visible and to value, with critical reflexivity, the importance of the Atlas, by proposing a collective and creative method. These are not, however, reports, strictly speaking, but rather narratives-within, connected and partial. Following a holographic logic, i.e. proceeding by relational demultiplications, our approach thus proposes a plural field experience of the site, in an attempt to render an experience of the more-than-human anthropocene.
{"title":"Sonder le Feral Atlas : enquêtes de terrain holographiques","authors":"Jeremie Brugidou, Julien Beauté, Jeanne Etelain, Anne-Sofie Dichman, Gregorio Paz Iriarte, Dai Li","doi":"10.1177/05390184231164558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231164558","url":null,"abstract":"We are a group of young researchers in environmental humanities gathered under the label ‘Pirate Laboratory’ at the ENS Ulm. It is within this framework that we have taken a keen interest in the stimulating digital project: Feral Atlas. The More-Than-Human Anthropocene. In order to make the Feral Atlas visible and understandable, we collectively wrote a creative text, based on narrative entanglements. It would seem that the experience of digital ethnography proposed by the Feral Atlas is, by its very form and structure, a kind of response, a proposal of what ferality can be. We would like to approach this ferality by presenting our crossed field experiences on the Atlas, in a way that is as unconventional as the interface itself. The stake is thus both to make visible and to value, with critical reflexivity, the importance of the Atlas, by proposing a collective and creative method. These are not, however, reports, strictly speaking, but rather narratives-within, connected and partial. Following a holographic logic, i.e. proceeding by relational demultiplications, our approach thus proposes a plural field experience of the site, in an attempt to render an experience of the more-than-human anthropocene.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"62 1","pages":"135 - 154"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42167261","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231172701
Richard Atimniraye Nyelade, Dunfu Zhang
The present work unfolds along a socio-historical analysis of current events, specifically the murder of a young man in a royal building in Northern Cameroon. Our exchanges with local residents on social networks (WhatsApp, Facebook) between 2017 and 2022, coupled with a conceptual analysis of lamidism – understood here as a full-fledged governance system – also served the empirical trajectory of our analysis. In order to establish a singular conceptualization of what we call ‘lamidality of power,’ this article operates in three stages. First, it revisits the socio-historical conditions that led to the emergence of lamidism in Northern Cameroon. Then, it analyzes the strategies implemented by power to impose this epistemic and political vision of sovereign exercise in Northern Cameroon. Finally, we discuss the importance of specifying the very concept of lamidism to better understand its contemporary extensions and updates.
{"title":"Du lamidalisme à la lamidalité du pouvoir au Nord-Cameroun","authors":"Richard Atimniraye Nyelade, Dunfu Zhang","doi":"10.1177/05390184231172701","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231172701","url":null,"abstract":"The present work unfolds along a socio-historical analysis of current events, specifically the murder of a young man in a royal building in Northern Cameroon. Our exchanges with local residents on social networks (WhatsApp, Facebook) between 2017 and 2022, coupled with a conceptual analysis of lamidism – understood here as a full-fledged governance system – also served the empirical trajectory of our analysis. In order to establish a singular conceptualization of what we call ‘lamidality of power,’ this article operates in three stages. First, it revisits the socio-historical conditions that led to the emergence of lamidism in Northern Cameroon. Then, it analyzes the strategies implemented by power to impose this epistemic and political vision of sovereign exercise in Northern Cameroon. Finally, we discuss the importance of specifying the very concept of lamidism to better understand its contemporary extensions and updates.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"62 1","pages":"74 - 105"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45547932","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231167025
Yeray Zamorano Diaz
The relations between the intellectual field and the journalistic field in Spain have been the subject of many studies, but little attention has been paid to the social conditions of these relations. This article presents an inventory of the conditions in which takes place the intellectuals’ participation in the journalistic field, based on the specific case study of the Spanish journal El País in the early years of the Post-Transición. This case is approached using a mixed methodology that includes the analysis of secondary data, the documentary analysis of the testimonies of various protagonists and a prosopography of 452 individuals who write op-eds in the journal. The results show the variety and effects of the social conditions involved in the intellectuals’ participation in the newspaper, from the limitations imposed by the economic dimension to the specific action of journalists, as well as the implicit requirements to become a contributor. These results lead to a rethinking of the terms of some of the debates that the intellectuals’ participation in the media has traditionally provoked.
{"title":"Les conditions sociales de la collaboration intellectuelle dans les moyens de grande diffusion. Le cas du journal espagnol El País (1986–1990)","authors":"Yeray Zamorano Diaz","doi":"10.1177/05390184231167025","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231167025","url":null,"abstract":"The relations between the intellectual field and the journalistic field in Spain have been the subject of many studies, but little attention has been paid to the social conditions of these relations. This article presents an inventory of the conditions in which takes place the intellectuals’ participation in the journalistic field, based on the specific case study of the Spanish journal El País in the early years of the Post-Transición. This case is approached using a mixed methodology that includes the analysis of secondary data, the documentary analysis of the testimonies of various protagonists and a prosopography of 452 individuals who write op-eds in the journal. The results show the variety and effects of the social conditions involved in the intellectuals’ participation in the newspaper, from the limitations imposed by the economic dimension to the specific action of journalists, as well as the implicit requirements to become a contributor. These results lead to a rethinking of the terms of some of the debates that the intellectuals’ participation in the media has traditionally provoked.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"62 1","pages":"50 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49044487","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231173221
G. Chiara, D. Romaioli, A. Contarello
Published studies on social representations of migration in the media offer two pictures that have become crystallized over time. On the one hand, migration is constructed as a social threat for hosting countries; on the other, victimization of migrants is emphasized. This study aims to investigate how literary texts written by the protagonists of migratory experiences contribute to creating a possible alternative view of migrants. The results highlight a tension in the discourse on migration. They show that this literature conveys different worldviews, which can be arranged in two macro-groups. Narratives of victimization emerge, but are counterbalanced by narratives of resilience, post-traumatic growth, and the ability to react and cope with difficulties, and also by narrative of resistance oriented toward ensuring the recognition of the identity of second-generation Italians. This contribution concludes with reflections on the pragmatic value of conducting psychosocial research on literary texts.
{"title":"Migrations in postcolonial Italian literature: Quali-quantitative analysis in a social representation framework","authors":"G. Chiara, D. Romaioli, A. Contarello","doi":"10.1177/05390184231173221","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231173221","url":null,"abstract":"Published studies on social representations of migration in the media offer two pictures that have become crystallized over time. On the one hand, migration is constructed as a social threat for hosting countries; on the other, victimization of migrants is emphasized. This study aims to investigate how literary texts written by the protagonists of migratory experiences contribute to creating a possible alternative view of migrants. The results highlight a tension in the discourse on migration. They show that this literature conveys different worldviews, which can be arranged in two macro-groups. Narratives of victimization emerge, but are counterbalanced by narratives of resilience, post-traumatic growth, and the ability to react and cope with difficulties, and also by narrative of resistance oriented toward ensuring the recognition of the identity of second-generation Italians. This contribution concludes with reflections on the pragmatic value of conducting psychosocial research on literary texts.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"62 1","pages":"106 - 134"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45039705","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231170567
Jonathan Bendor, Philip Petrov
This article synthesizes a large body of research in the social and cognitive sciences to develop a distinctly cognitive understanding of political identity. Building on dual-process and computational theories of mind, the article defends three claims about the mental and behavioral implications of identity in political domains: (1) identity-based thinking is people’s default (often fast, automatic, and cognitively inaccessible) way of mentally representing politics and of drawing inferences based on those representations; (2) people are not limited to identity-based thinking and can sometimes learn to override it via slow, volitional, and conscious reasoning; and (3) the cognitive complexity of identity-based thinking is in-between the levels of mental sophistication that the Michigan and Rochester Schools in political science posit. This account of political identity illuminates, inter alia, why even low-information voters can quickly identify their political allies and opponents, why even high-information politicians can misperceive their constituents, why affective polarization has been increasing in the United States in recent decades, and why many normative theories of justice advise people to override identity-based thinking.
{"title":"Between Michigan and Rochester: Identity-based thinking is cognitively primary","authors":"Jonathan Bendor, Philip Petrov","doi":"10.1177/05390184231170567","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231170567","url":null,"abstract":"This article synthesizes a large body of research in the social and cognitive sciences to develop a distinctly cognitive understanding of political identity. Building on dual-process and computational theories of mind, the article defends three claims about the mental and behavioral implications of identity in political domains: (1) identity-based thinking is people’s default (often fast, automatic, and cognitively inaccessible) way of mentally representing politics and of drawing inferences based on those representations; (2) people are not limited to identity-based thinking and can sometimes learn to override it via slow, volitional, and conscious reasoning; and (3) the cognitive complexity of identity-based thinking is in-between the levels of mental sophistication that the Michigan and Rochester Schools in political science posit. This account of political identity illuminates, inter alia, why even low-information voters can quickly identify their political allies and opponents, why even high-information politicians can misperceive their constituents, why affective polarization has been increasing in the United States in recent decades, and why many normative theories of justice advise people to override identity-based thinking.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"62 1","pages":"3 - 30"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43069054","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184221138493
Hudson Meadwell
Qualitative political analysis has made substantial methodological progress in the last 25 years. This article examines the contributions to this progress made by the work of three American social scientists (King, Keohane, and Verba, 2021 [1994], hereafter KKV) and the responses that their work provoked. The article identifies a recurring ambiguity in this methodological literature. In the quantitative tradition to which KKV want to hold qualitative methods endogeneity is a methodological problem that induces a search for methodological workarounds. Yet in qualitative work, endogeneity is often more a basic feature of the social and political world that needs to be modeled directly. While there can be substantial theoretical differences in how these features are modeled, the presumption is that endogeneity is more an ontological claim than a methodological problem. The article identifies how this ambiguity first arises in the work of KKV and then traces out the implications through a discussion of a range of methodological options, from process tracing to instrumental variables.
{"title":"Endogeneity and qualitative political analysis: Debates about method or debates about ontology?","authors":"Hudson Meadwell","doi":"10.1177/05390184221138493","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184221138493","url":null,"abstract":"Qualitative political analysis has made substantial methodological progress in the last 25 years. This article examines the contributions to this progress made by the work of three American social scientists (King, Keohane, and Verba, 2021 [1994], hereafter KKV) and the responses that their work provoked. The article identifies a recurring ambiguity in this methodological literature. In the quantitative tradition to which KKV want to hold qualitative methods endogeneity is a methodological problem that induces a search for methodological workarounds. Yet in qualitative work, endogeneity is often more a basic feature of the social and political world that needs to be modeled directly. While there can be substantial theoretical differences in how these features are modeled, the presumption is that endogeneity is more an ontological claim than a methodological problem. The article identifies how this ambiguity first arises in the work of KKV and then traces out the implications through a discussion of a range of methodological options, from process tracing to instrumental variables.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"61 1","pages":"390 - 406"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46354265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231158195
Björn Hammarfelt, Olof Hallonsten
In this article, we problematize the notion that the continuously growing use of bibliometric evaluation can be effectively explained by ‘neoliberal’ ideology. A prerequisite for our analysis is an understanding of neoliberalism as both denoting a more limited set of concrete principles for the organization of society (the narrow interpretation) or as a hegemonic ideology (the broad interpretation). This conceptual framework, as well as brief history of evaluative bibliometrics, provides an analytical framing for our approach, in which four national research evaluation systems are compared: Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. On basis of an analysis of the rationales for implementing these systems, as well as their specific design, we discuss the existence or non-existence of neoliberal motivations and rationales. Overall, we find that a relatively homogeneous academic landscape, with a high degree of centralization and government steering, appears to be a common feature for countries implementing national evaluation systems relying on bibliometrics. Such characteristics, we argue, may not be inductively understood as neoliberal but as indications of national states displaying strong political steering of its research system. Consequently, if used without further clarification, ‘neoliberalism’ is a concept too broad and diluted to be useful when analyzing the development of research evaluation and bibliometric measures in the past half a century.
{"title":"Are evaluative bibliometrics neoliberal? A historical and theoretical problematization","authors":"Björn Hammarfelt, Olof Hallonsten","doi":"10.1177/05390184231158195","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231158195","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, we problematize the notion that the continuously growing use of bibliometric evaluation can be effectively explained by ‘neoliberal’ ideology. A prerequisite for our analysis is an understanding of neoliberalism as both denoting a more limited set of concrete principles for the organization of society (the narrow interpretation) or as a hegemonic ideology (the broad interpretation). This conceptual framework, as well as brief history of evaluative bibliometrics, provides an analytical framing for our approach, in which four national research evaluation systems are compared: Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. On basis of an analysis of the rationales for implementing these systems, as well as their specific design, we discuss the existence or non-existence of neoliberal motivations and rationales. Overall, we find that a relatively homogeneous academic landscape, with a high degree of centralization and government steering, appears to be a common feature for countries implementing national evaluation systems relying on bibliometrics. Such characteristics, we argue, may not be inductively understood as neoliberal but as indications of national states displaying strong political steering of its research system. Consequently, if used without further clarification, ‘neoliberalism’ is a concept too broad and diluted to be useful when analyzing the development of research evaluation and bibliometric measures in the past half a century.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"61 1","pages":"414 - 438"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42573363","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184231158210
Oliver J. Wieczorek, R. Münch, Daniel Schubert
Our study investigates the impact of the British Research Assessment Exercise in 2008 and Research Excellence Framework in 2014 on the diversity and topic structure of UK sociology departments from the perspective of habitus-field theory. Empirically, we train a Latent Dirichlet allocation on 819,673 abstracts stemming from the journals in which British sociologists submitted at least one paper in the Research Assessment Exercise 2008 or Research Excellence Framework 2014. We then employ the trained model on the 4822 papers submitted in the Research Assessment Exercise 2008 and 2014. Finally, we apply multiple factor analysis to project the properties of the departments in the topic space. Our topic model uncovers generally low levels of research diversity. Topics with global reach related to political elites, demography, knowledge transfer, and climate change are on the rise, whereas locally constrained research topics on social problems and different dimensions of social inequality get less prevalent. Additionally, some of the declining topics are getting more aligned to elite institutions and high ratings. Furthermore, we see that the associations between different funding bodies, topics covered, and specialties among sociology departments changed from 2008 to 2014. Nonetheless, topics aligned to different societal elites are found to be associated with high Research Assessment Exercise/Research Excellence Framework scores, while social engineering topics, postcolonial- and cultural-related, as well as more abstract topics are related to lower Research Assessment Exercise/Research Excellence Framework scores.
{"title":"All power to the reviewers: British sociology under two-level supervision of the Research Excellence Framework","authors":"Oliver J. Wieczorek, R. Münch, Daniel Schubert","doi":"10.1177/05390184231158210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184231158210","url":null,"abstract":"Our study investigates the impact of the British Research Assessment Exercise in 2008 and Research Excellence Framework in 2014 on the diversity and topic structure of UK sociology departments from the perspective of habitus-field theory. Empirically, we train a Latent Dirichlet allocation on 819,673 abstracts stemming from the journals in which British sociologists submitted at least one paper in the Research Assessment Exercise 2008 or Research Excellence Framework 2014. We then employ the trained model on the 4822 papers submitted in the Research Assessment Exercise 2008 and 2014. Finally, we apply multiple factor analysis to project the properties of the departments in the topic space. Our topic model uncovers generally low levels of research diversity. Topics with global reach related to political elites, demography, knowledge transfer, and climate change are on the rise, whereas locally constrained research topics on social problems and different dimensions of social inequality get less prevalent. Additionally, some of the declining topics are getting more aligned to elite institutions and high ratings. Furthermore, we see that the associations between different funding bodies, topics covered, and specialties among sociology departments changed from 2008 to 2014. Nonetheless, topics aligned to different societal elites are found to be associated with high Research Assessment Exercise/Research Excellence Framework scores, while social engineering topics, postcolonial- and cultural-related, as well as more abstract topics are related to lower Research Assessment Exercise/Research Excellence Framework scores.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"61 1","pages":"481 - 528"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47480988","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-01DOI: 10.1177/05390184221142218
S. Macdonald
The use of quantitative performance indicators to measure quality in academic publishing has undercut peer review’s qualitative assessment of articles submitted to journals. The two might have co-existed quite amicably were the most common indicator, citation, on which the journal impact factor is based, not been so susceptible to gaming. Gaming of citations is ubiquitous in academic publishing and referees are powerless to prevent it. The article gives some indication of how the citation game is played. It then moves on from academic publishing in general to look at academic publishing in medicine, a discipline in which authorship is also gamed. Many authors in medicine have made no meaningful contribution to the article that bears their names, and those who have contributed most are often not named as authors. Author slots are openly bought and sold. The problem is magnified by the academic publishing industry and by academic institutions, pleased to pretend that peer review is safeguarding scholarship. In complete contrast, the editors of medicine’s leading journals are scathing about just how ineffectual is peer review in medicine. Other disciplines should take note lest they fall into the mire in which medicine is sinking.
{"title":"The gaming of citation and authorship in academic journals: a warning from medicine","authors":"S. Macdonald","doi":"10.1177/05390184221142218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/05390184221142218","url":null,"abstract":"The use of quantitative performance indicators to measure quality in academic publishing has undercut peer review’s qualitative assessment of articles submitted to journals. The two might have co-existed quite amicably were the most common indicator, citation, on which the journal impact factor is based, not been so susceptible to gaming. Gaming of citations is ubiquitous in academic publishing and referees are powerless to prevent it. The article gives some indication of how the citation game is played. It then moves on from academic publishing in general to look at academic publishing in medicine, a discipline in which authorship is also gamed. Many authors in medicine have made no meaningful contribution to the article that bears their names, and those who have contributed most are often not named as authors. Author slots are openly bought and sold. The problem is magnified by the academic publishing industry and by academic institutions, pleased to pretend that peer review is safeguarding scholarship. In complete contrast, the editors of medicine’s leading journals are scathing about just how ineffectual is peer review in medicine. Other disciplines should take note lest they fall into the mire in which medicine is sinking.","PeriodicalId":47697,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Information Sur Les Sciences Sociales","volume":"61 1","pages":"457 - 480"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48838335","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：