学术界忽视他人工作的艺术:学术信息搜索的猜谜游戏模型。

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Mikhail Sokolov
{"title":"学术界忽视他人工作的艺术:学术信息搜索的猜谜游戏模型。","authors":"Mikhail Sokolov","doi":"10.1177/03063127221119808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Why do scholars pay attention to some works, but not others? This article explores a theoretical model in which scholars search the literature to make sure that their findings are new to their immediate audience. Within the present model, individuals easily disregard literatures of which their audiences are probably unaware. Institutionally organized audiences thus serve as enforcers of the information search. Their members may tacitly collaborate in maintaining unawareness of intellectual developments outside of their common attention space. This model allows us to explain phenomena on which earlier models fail - for example why academics sometimes ignore apparently relevant sources of information or how groups of scholars turn into bubbles, censoring information about findings made in the outside world.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"53 2","pages":"300-312"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The art of ignoring others' work among academics: A guessing game model of scholarly information search.\",\"authors\":\"Mikhail Sokolov\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/03063127221119808\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Why do scholars pay attention to some works, but not others? This article explores a theoretical model in which scholars search the literature to make sure that their findings are new to their immediate audience. Within the present model, individuals easily disregard literatures of which their audiences are probably unaware. Institutionally organized audiences thus serve as enforcers of the information search. Their members may tacitly collaborate in maintaining unawareness of intellectual developments outside of their common attention space. This model allows us to explain phenomena on which earlier models fail - for example why academics sometimes ignore apparently relevant sources of information or how groups of scholars turn into bubbles, censoring information about findings made in the outside world.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"volume\":\"53 2\",\"pages\":\"300-312\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Studies of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221119808\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221119808","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为什么学者们关注某些作品,而不关注其他作品?本文探讨了一个理论模型,在这个模型中,学者们搜索文献,以确保他们的发现对他们的直接受众来说是新的。在目前的模式下,个人很容易忽视他们的读者可能不知道的文献。因此,机构组织的受众充当信息搜索的执行者。他们的成员可能会心照不宣地合作,在他们共同的注意力空间之外保持对智力发展的无知。这个模型使我们能够解释早期模型无法解释的现象——例如,为什么学者有时会忽视明显相关的信息来源,或者学者群体如何变成泡沫,审查外界发现的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The art of ignoring others' work among academics: A guessing game model of scholarly information search.

Why do scholars pay attention to some works, but not others? This article explores a theoretical model in which scholars search the literature to make sure that their findings are new to their immediate audience. Within the present model, individuals easily disregard literatures of which their audiences are probably unaware. Institutionally organized audiences thus serve as enforcers of the information search. Their members may tacitly collaborate in maintaining unawareness of intellectual developments outside of their common attention space. This model allows us to explain phenomena on which earlier models fail - for example why academics sometimes ignore apparently relevant sources of information or how groups of scholars turn into bubbles, censoring information about findings made in the outside world.

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
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
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