经济学研究课题的空间:瑞士经济学的科学立场与个人立场

IF 0.3 Q4 ECONOMICS
Thierry Rossier, Pierre Benz, Anton Grau Larsen, Kristoffer Kropp
{"title":"经济学研究课题的空间:瑞士经济学的科学立场与个人立场","authors":"Thierry Rossier, Pierre Benz, Anton Grau Larsen, Kristoffer Kropp","doi":"10.4000/oeconomia.15359","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Within the Social Studies of Economics, research has been dominated by case-oriented approaches. In this article, we propose and demonstrate the value of adding a quantitative, field-theoretical approach. Specifically, we outline a perspective for studying economics as a social field, focusing on the homology between research topics and the resources and characteristics of researchers. We specifically attend to the Swiss case, entailing integration of this highly internationalised discipline within national elite networks. Our study draws on a combination of two data sources: the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), which provides abstracts of all projects funded since 2008, and the Swiss Elite Database, which contains extensive prosopographical data on all tenured economics professors employed at Swiss universities. In the first analytical part of the study, we construct the space of research topics based on 637 abstracts using Latent Dirichlet Allocation, a topic modelling technique. We identify a set of recurring topics, using multiple correspondence analysis to project these topics into a geometric space, thereby identifying three main dimensions structuring the space of the topics: (1) financial markets versus labour and behaviour economics, (2) macroeconomics versus microeconomics and (3) public economics versus labour economics. In the second part of the study, we map the most frequently used terms in relation to the profiles of the 647 applicants (including 156 economics professors). Our findings reveal a homology existing between the space of topics and the space of individual positions. Unlike microeconomics topics, macroeconomics topics are linked to scientific and academic prestige. Other individual properties and resources, such as those related to public expertise, corporate networks or gender are linked, respectively, to the study of state and public concerns and market surveillance, corporate governance, and gendered inequalities in the workplace. This article provides an original quantitative and computational approach that opens up new and promising research avenues for expanding the Social Studies of Economics and the history of economic thought.","PeriodicalId":43377,"journal":{"name":"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy","volume":"257 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Space of Research Topics in Economics: Scientific Position-Takings and Individual Positions in Swiss Economic Science\",\"authors\":\"Thierry Rossier, Pierre Benz, Anton Grau Larsen, Kristoffer Kropp\",\"doi\":\"10.4000/oeconomia.15359\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Within the Social Studies of Economics, research has been dominated by case-oriented approaches. In this article, we propose and demonstrate the value of adding a quantitative, field-theoretical approach. Specifically, we outline a perspective for studying economics as a social field, focusing on the homology between research topics and the resources and characteristics of researchers. We specifically attend to the Swiss case, entailing integration of this highly internationalised discipline within national elite networks. Our study draws on a combination of two data sources: the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), which provides abstracts of all projects funded since 2008, and the Swiss Elite Database, which contains extensive prosopographical data on all tenured economics professors employed at Swiss universities. In the first analytical part of the study, we construct the space of research topics based on 637 abstracts using Latent Dirichlet Allocation, a topic modelling technique. We identify a set of recurring topics, using multiple correspondence analysis to project these topics into a geometric space, thereby identifying three main dimensions structuring the space of the topics: (1) financial markets versus labour and behaviour economics, (2) macroeconomics versus microeconomics and (3) public economics versus labour economics. In the second part of the study, we map the most frequently used terms in relation to the profiles of the 647 applicants (including 156 economics professors). Our findings reveal a homology existing between the space of topics and the space of individual positions. Unlike microeconomics topics, macroeconomics topics are linked to scientific and academic prestige. Other individual properties and resources, such as those related to public expertise, corporate networks or gender are linked, respectively, to the study of state and public concerns and market surveillance, corporate governance, and gendered inequalities in the workplace. This article provides an original quantitative and computational approach that opens up new and promising research avenues for expanding the Social Studies of Economics and the history of economic thought.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"257 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4000/oeconomia.15359\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/oeconomia.15359","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在经济学的社会研究中,研究一直以案例导向的方法为主。在本文中,我们提出并论证了增加定量、实地理论方法的价值。具体而言,我们概述了将经济学作为一个社会领域进行研究的视角,重点关注研究主题与研究人员的资源和特征之间的同源性。我们特别关注瑞士的案例,将这一高度国际化的学科整合到国家精英网络中。我们的研究结合了两个数据来源:瑞士国家科学基金会(SNSF)和瑞士精英数据库(Swiss Elite Database),前者提供了自2008年以来所有资助项目的摘要,后者包含了瑞士大学聘用的所有终身经济学教授的大量专业数据。在研究的第一个分析部分,我们基于637篇摘要,使用Latent Dirichlet Allocation(一种主题建模技术)构建了研究主题空间。我们确定了一组反复出现的主题,使用多重对应分析将这些主题投射到几何空间中,从而确定了构建主题空间的三个主要维度:(1)金融市场与劳动力和行为经济学,(2)宏观经济学与微观经济学,(3)公共经济学与劳动经济学。在研究的第二部分,我们绘制了与647名申请者(包括156名经济学教授)的个人资料相关的最常用术语图。我们的研究结果揭示了话题空间和个人位置空间之间存在同源性。与微观经济学主题不同,宏观经济学主题与科学和学术声望有关。其他个人财产和资源,例如与公共专业知识、公司网络或性别相关的财产和资源,分别与国家和公众关注的问题和市场监督、公司治理以及工作场所的性别不平等的研究有关。本文提供了一种原始的定量和计算方法,为扩展经济学的社会研究和经济思想史开辟了新的和有前途的研究途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Space of Research Topics in Economics: Scientific Position-Takings and Individual Positions in Swiss Economic Science
Within the Social Studies of Economics, research has been dominated by case-oriented approaches. In this article, we propose and demonstrate the value of adding a quantitative, field-theoretical approach. Specifically, we outline a perspective for studying economics as a social field, focusing on the homology between research topics and the resources and characteristics of researchers. We specifically attend to the Swiss case, entailing integration of this highly internationalised discipline within national elite networks. Our study draws on a combination of two data sources: the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF), which provides abstracts of all projects funded since 2008, and the Swiss Elite Database, which contains extensive prosopographical data on all tenured economics professors employed at Swiss universities. In the first analytical part of the study, we construct the space of research topics based on 637 abstracts using Latent Dirichlet Allocation, a topic modelling technique. We identify a set of recurring topics, using multiple correspondence analysis to project these topics into a geometric space, thereby identifying three main dimensions structuring the space of the topics: (1) financial markets versus labour and behaviour economics, (2) macroeconomics versus microeconomics and (3) public economics versus labour economics. In the second part of the study, we map the most frequently used terms in relation to the profiles of the 647 applicants (including 156 economics professors). Our findings reveal a homology existing between the space of topics and the space of individual positions. Unlike microeconomics topics, macroeconomics topics are linked to scientific and academic prestige. Other individual properties and resources, such as those related to public expertise, corporate networks or gender are linked, respectively, to the study of state and public concerns and market surveillance, corporate governance, and gendered inequalities in the workplace. This article provides an original quantitative and computational approach that opens up new and promising research avenues for expanding the Social Studies of Economics and the history of economic thought.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
35 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信