Acknowledgments-based networks for mapping the social structure of research fields. A case study on recent analytic philosophy

Synthese 200 (3):1-40 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In the last decades, research in science mapping has delivered several powerful techniques, based on citation or textual analysis, for charting the intellectual organization of research fields. To map the social network underlying science and scholarship, by contrast, science mapping has mainly relied on one method, co-authorship analysis. This method, however, suffers from well-known limitations related to the practice of authorship. Moreover, it does not perform well on those fields where multi-authored publications are rare. In this study, a new method for mapping the social structure of research fields is advanced, based on the analysis of the acknowledgments of academic publications. We first discuss the standard account of the function of acknowledgments in scholarly communication, then we introduce a new interpretative framework in which the acknowledgments are intended as positioning signals exchanged by researchers. Next, we provide the formal definition of the four acknowledgments-based networks that stand at the core of the method, and we test it on a humanities field, analytic philosophy. Results show that acknowledgement-based networks allow to reconstruct the fine-grained social structure of analytic philosophy from different perspectives. Furthermore, by comparing the citation-based maps of the field with the acknowledgments-based networks, it permits to shed light on the relationship between the intellectual and social layer of analytic philosophy. We conclude by presenting practical limitations of the method and by sketching some further research lines.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Activists and Business.Frank G. A. de Bakker, Iina Hellsten & Anne M. Kok - 2011 - Proceedings of the International Association for Business and Society 22:469-478.
Corporate Responsibilities in Internet-Enabled Social Networks.Stephen Chen - 2009 - Journal of Business Ethics 90 (S4):523 - 536.
The Meaning Structure of Social Networks.Jan A. Fuhse - 2009 - Sociological Theory 27 (1):51 - 73.
Social-networking and barriers.S. Vangorodskaya & L. Kolpina - 2012 - Epistemological studies in Philosophy, Social and Political Sciences 4 (22):189-193.
Playing with networks: how economists explain. [REVIEW]Caterina Marchionni - 2013 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 3 (3):331-352.
Mechanism-based theorizing and generalization from case studies.Petri Ylikoski - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 78 (C):14-22.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-05-07

Downloads
13 (#1,013,785)

6 months
8 (#347,798)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Eugenio Petrovich
Tilburg University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to the Actor-Network Theory.Bruno Latour - 2005 - Oxford, England and New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.
Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge.Karin Knorr-Cetina - 1999 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
How to Do Digital Philosophy of Science.Charles H. Pence & Grant Ramsey - 2018 - Philosophy of Science 85 (5):930-941.

View all 15 references / Add more references