The Structure of Russian Sociological Field – 2020

An earlier study, conducted in 2009–2010, which the present authors were a part of, demonstrated that the sociological population of St. Petersburg, Russia, was divided into isolated “bubbles” drawn apart by their adherence to localist or globalist ideology. The localist ideology ascribed greater importance to sociologists' catering to their country's social problems, praised the development of the national sociological tradition, and was skeptical about the applicability of “Western” theories to the Russian case. The globalist ideology, on the contrary, urged sociologists to address international audiences and ascribed greater value to international recognition. The aim of this study, based on an online survey of 1035 sociologists using nation-wide sample was to establish if (a) the localist-globlist divide was still present 10 years later and (2) if it was traceable at the national level. We studied the intellectual authority structures using nominations during a reputation survey as a source, and the bimodal network analysis as a method. We also studied “attention spaces” (Collins) using direct questions about one's familiarity with peer's work. The answer to both of our questions is positive: globalist and localist bubbles continue existing, and their boundaries are not a product of theoretical or methodological divides (e.g. positivism vs. antipositivism, qualitative vs quantitative methodology), or specialization on different subject areas. Age exerts independent influence on the formation of attention spaces, but not on the authority structures. We conclude by discussing the causes of the persistence of local vs. global divide.

Keywords

sociology of science, sociology of sociology, information bubbles, reputation surveys, sociology in Russia

Received

12.12.2021

Publication date

22.12.2021

Number of characters

38094

Cite

GOST	Safonova M., Sokolov M. The Structure of Russian Sociological Field – 2020 // Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya – 2021. – Issue 11 C. 91-105 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ras.jes.su/socis/s013216250017907-0-1-en (circulation date: 26.04.2024). DOI: 10.31857/S013216250015488-9
MLA	Safonova, Maria, Sokolov, Mikhail M "The Structure of Russian Sociological Field – 2020." Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya 11 (2021):91-105. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250015488-9
APA	Safonova M., Sokolov M. (2021). The Structure of Russian Sociological Field – 2020. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya (11), pp.91-105 DOI: 10.31857/S013216250015488-9

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: 1, views: 899

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Safonova M. (2012) Network structure and identities in a local community of sociologists. Sotsiologicheskie issledovanija [Sociological Studies]. No. 6: 107–120. (In Russ.)

2. Sokolov M. (2021) Academic recognition in Russian sociology: A study using reputation surveys. Sotsiologicheskie issledovanija [Sociological Studies]. No. 3: 44–56. (In Russ.)

3. Sokolov M. (2021). Science as a ceremonial exchange. A theory of attention spaces, academic status, and symbolic struggles. Sociologicheskoe obozrenie [The Russian Sociological Review]. No. 3: 9–42. (In Russ.)

4. Beigel F., Gallardo O., Bekerman F. (2018) Institutional expansion and scientific development in the periphery: The structural heterogeneity of Argentina’s academic field. Minerva. Vol. 56. No. 3: 305–331.

5. Blondel V. D., Guillaume J. L., Lambiotte R., Lefebvre E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of statistical mechanics: theory and experiment. Vol. 10: 10008.

6. Collins R. (1989) Toward a theory of intellectual change: the social causes of philosophies. Science, technology, & human values. No. 14(2): 107–140.

7. Gans H. (1992) Sociological amnesia: The noncumulation of normal social science. Sociological Forum. Vol. 75. No. 4: 701–710.

8. Horowitz M., Haynor A., Kickham K. (2018). Sociology’s sacred victims and the politics of knowledge: Moral foundations theory and disciplinary controversies. The American Sociologist. Vol. 49. No. 4: 459–495.

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

10. Sokolov M. (2019) The sources of academic localism and globalism in Russian sociology: The choice of professional ideologies and occupational niches among social scientists. Current Sociology. Vol. 67. No. 6: 818–837.