Academic Recognition in Russian Sociology: A Study Using Reputation Surveys

The paper reports the results of a reputation survey using a sample derived from the Russian index for scientific citing and covering the grand majority of Russian actively publishing sociologists. Overall, invitation was sent to 3689 individuals, 818 (22%) of whom answered to all of the survey questions. Based on the survey results, individual reputation rankings were calculated. The disciplinary elite, as depicted by the study, is predominantly male, of senior age (the median age among top-20 figures is 70 years old) and Moscow-based (18 of top-20 are residing in Moscow). Two institutions employing most of the members of the disciplinary elite are the Institute of sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Higher School of Economics. The HSE together with the Moscow and Saint Petersburg State universities are the most reputed institutions as far as the undergraduate education is concerned; they are joined by the Moscow Higher School of Social and Economic Sciences and European university at Saint Petersburg at the level of graduate education. Interestingly, university reputation seem only loosely connected with their employing widely recognized scholars. Readership of Russian-language sociological periodicals was also measured revealing that the majority of journals are scarcely read by anybody, owing their existence to the publication pressures exerted by the state. Sotsiologicheskie issledovanija (“Sociological Studies”) retains the position of the major Russian sociological outlet. There is no evidence of strong polarization among Russian sociologists, although there is evidence of significant fragmentation. Figures admired in their own circles are scarcely known in other circles, with the work of some of the personalities having the greatest numbers of admirers not known to as much as 40% of the population.

Keywords

sociology of science, scientometrics, sociology of sociology, academic reputations, academic recognition, university rankings, rankings of academic journals, reputation surveys, sociology in Russia

Received

19.03.2021

Publication date

26.03.2021

Number of characters

26880

Cite

GOST	Sokolov M. Academic Recognition in Russian Sociology: A Study Using Reputation Surveys // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya – 2021. – Issue 3 C. 44-56 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/socis/s013216250013728-3-1-en (circulation date: 25.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250013728-3
MLA	Sokolov, Mikhail M "Academic Recognition in Russian Sociology: A Study Using Reputation Surveys." Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 3 (2021):44-56. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250013728-3
APA	Sokolov M. (2021). Academic Recognition in Russian Sociology: A Study Using Reputation Surveys. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (3), pp.44-56 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250013728-3

100 rub.

When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 0, views: 1016

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Губа К.С. "Merton College": от концептуализации к эмпирической программе социологии науки // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. 2015. Т. 18. № 2. С. 130–145. [Guba K.S. (2015) “Merton college”: From conceptualization to the empirical programme in the sociology of science. Zhurnal sotsiologii I sotsial'noj antropologii [Journal of sociology of social anthropology]. Vol. 18(2): 130–145. (In Russ.)]

2. Кинчарова А.В. Методология мировых рейтингов университетов: анализ и критика // Университетское управление: практика и анализ. 2014. Т. 90. № 2. С. 70–80. [Kincharova A.V. (2014) The methodology of world university rankings: An analysis and critique. Universitetskoe upravlenie: praktika I analiz. [University governance: practice and analysis]. Vol. 90(2): 70– 80 (In Russ.)]

3. Соколов М.М. Проблема консолидации авторитета в постсоветской науке. // Антропологический форум. 2008. № 9. С. 8–31. [Sokolov M.M. (2008) The failed consolidation of authority in post-Soviet academia. Anthropologicheskij Forum [Forum for Anthropology and Culture]. Vol. 9. No. 1: 3–24. (In Russ.)]

4. Соколов М.М. Демографические и социальные профили субдисциплин в советской и российской социологии // Социологические исследования. 2015. №9. C. 49–56 [Sokolov M.M. (2015) Demographic and social profiles of sub-disciplines in Soviet and Russian sociology. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 9: 49–56 (In Russ.)]

5. Соколов М.М., Губа К.С., Зименкова Т.С., Сафонова М.А., Чуйкина С.А. Как становятся профессорами. Академические рынки, карьеры и власть в пяти странах. Москва: НЛО, 2015. [Sokolov M.M., Guba K.S., Safonova M.A., Tchouikina S.A., Zimenkova T.S. (2015) Becoming a Professor. Academic Markets, Careers, and Power in Five Countries Moscow: NLO. (In Russ.)]

6. Aksnes D.W., Langfeldt L., Wouters P. (2019) Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: An overview of basic concepts and theories. Sage Open. Vol. 9. No. 1, 2158244019829575. (accessed 29.12.2020).

7. Bornmann L., Daniel H.D. (2008) What do citation counts measure? A review of studies on citing behavior. Journal of documentation. Vol. 64. No. 1: 45–80

8. Bourdieu P. (1975) The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Information (International Social Science Council). Vol. 14. No. 6: 19–47.

9. Espeland W.N., Sauder M. (2007) Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American journal of sociology. Vol. 113. No. 1: 1–40.

10. Gläser J. (2004) Why are the most influential books in Australian sociology not necessarily the most highly cited ones? Journal of Sociology. Vol. 40. No. 3: 261–282.

11. Keith B., Babchuk N. (1998) The quest for institutional recognition: A longitudinal analysis of scholarly productivity and academic prestige among sociology departments. Social Forces. Vol. 76. No. 4: 1495–1533.

12. Latour B., Woolgar S. (1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. London; Beverley Hills: Sage.

13. Merton R.K. (1968) The Matthew Effect in Science. Science. Vol. 159: 56–63

14. Najman J.M., Hewitt B. (2003) The validity of publication and citation counts for sociology and other selected disciplines. Journal of Sociology. Vol. 39. No. 1: 62–80.

15. Scheff T.J. (1995) Academic gangs. Crime, law and social change. Vol. 23. (2): 157–162.

16. Shwed U., Bearman P.S. (2010) The temporal structure of scientific consensus formation. American sociological review. Vol. 75. No. 6: 817–840.

17. Tahamtan I., Bornmann, L. (2018) Core elements in the process of citing publications: Conceptual overview of the literature. Journal of Informetrics. Vol. 12. No. 1: 203–216.

18. Tahamtan I., Bornmann, L. (2019). What do citation counts measure? An updated review of studies on citations in scientific documents published between 2006 and 2018. Scientometrics. Vol. 121. No. 3: 1635–1684.

19. Van Selm M., Jankowski N. W. (2006). Conducting online surveys. Quality and quantity. Vol. 40. No. 3: 435–456.

20. Whitley R. 1984. The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences. Oxford and New York: The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press.