首页> 外文OA文献 >A comparative study on communication structures of Chinese journals in the social sciences
【2h】

A comparative study on communication structures of Chinese journals in the social sciences

机译:社会科学中文期刊传播结构比较研究

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

We argue that the communication structures in the Chinese social sciences have not yet been sufficiently reformed. Citation patterns among Chinese domestic journals in three subject areas—political science and Marxism, library and information science, and economics—are compared with their counterparts internationally. Like their colleagues in the natural and life sciences, Chinese scholars in the social sciences provide fewer references to journal publications than their international counterparts; like their international colleagues, social scientists provide fewer references than natural sciences. The resulting citation networks, therefore, are sparse. Nevertheless, the citation structures clearly suggest that the Chinese social sciences are far less specialized in terms of disciplinary delineations than their international counterparts. Marxism studies are more established than political science in China. In terms of the impact of the Chinese political system on academic fields, disciplines closely related to the political system are less specialized than those weakly related. In the discussion section, we explore reasons that may cause the current stagnation and provide policy recommendations.
机译:我们认为,中国社会科学中的交流结构尚未充分改革。将中国国内期刊在三个学科领域(政治科学和马克思主义,图书馆与信息科学以及经济学)的引文模式与国际同行进行比较。与自然科学和生命科学领域的同事一样,中国社会科学领域的学者对期刊出版物的引用要少于国际同行。像他们的国际同事一样,社会科学家提供的参考文献少于自然科学。因此,所得的引文网络很少。然而,引文结构清楚地表明,中国的社会科学在学科划分方面远不及国际同行。在中国,马克思主义研究比政治科学更为成熟。就中国政治制度对学术领域的影响而言,与政治制度密切相关的学科没有相对弱势的学科专业化。在讨论部分,我们探讨可能导致当前停滞的原因并提供政策建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号