Bo G. Ekelund Mikael Börjesson Sociology of Education and Culture Uppsala University A GDA of Literary Dissertation Bibliographies
“Transnational Strategies in Higher Education” Funded by the Swedish Research Council Corpus: 680 Ph.D. dissertation bibliographies (from 819) Time period: 1980-2005 • 319 from Departments of Literature • 269 from Departments of Modern Languages (English, Germanic, Romance) • 92 from other Departments • 194,558 bibliographical references
Primary sources Secondary sources
0,00 0,10 0,20 0,30 0,40 0,50 0,60 0,70 0,80 0,90 1,00 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1. Share of secondary sources 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Figure 2. By number of cited critics FCFC FCDC 5% (left) N=50,469 4% (2283) (1883) Figure 3. By number of citations (below) N=146,262 FCFC 22% (32,619) NFCC 92% (46303) Cited critics, three categories: Frequently cited foreign critics (FCFC) NFCC FCDC Frequently cited domestic critics (FCDC) 53% 25% Not frequently cited critics (NFCC) (77,111) (36,532)
To explore the pattern of choices among the references to the Frequently cited foreign critics Multiple Correspondence Analysis • 13 active variables • 44 modalities • 676 active cases
13 Active variables • Total number of references in the bibliography (RefTot) • Share of secondary sources given to Frequently cited critics (FCC) • Citations to theorists and critics: • Structural, etc • Marxist, etc • Feminist theory • Narrative theory • Hermeneutics, etc • Psychoanalytical theory, etc • Historical-sociological • “Textual” theories • Other types of theory • Postcolonial theory, etc • Archetypal, myth and symbol
13 Active questions, 676 Active cases: Eigenvalues 0,3 0,25 0,2 0,15 0,1 0,05 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Very strong first axis of haves and have-nots.
13 Active variables, 392 Active cases: Eigenvalues After removal of the bibliographies with citations in only five of 13 theory categories 0,2500 0,2000 0,1500 0,1000 0,0500 0,0000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Strong first two axes, no clear cut-off point after second axis
First axis: Left-hand pole Resistance to theory Structural 0; Marxist 0; Other 0; Hermeneutic 0
First axis: Left-hand pole Low on citational resources, generally Reftot <131
First axis: Left-hand pole Low conformity to the field’s recognition of authorities FCC: 0- 25% FCC: 26-39%
First Axis: Right-hand pole Embrace of theory Hermeneutic >3; Structural >12; Psychoanalysis >2; Other >2; Marxist >2
First Axis: Right-hand pole Rich in citational resources, generally RefTot: >430
First axis Poor vs Rich in recognized critical and theoretical secondary sources
Axis 1. Contributing variables and modalities Theory_struct2 20,4 Structural 1-2 4,3 Structural 12+ 11,6 Structural 0 4,1 Theory_other2 13,6 34,0 Other 0 4,1 Other >2 9,1 Theory_herm2 13,5 47,5 Hermeneutic 0 4,7 Hermeneutic >3 8,4 Theory_Marx2 11,9 59,4 Marxist 0 4,3 Marxist >2 7,3 Theory_histsoc2 8,1 67,5 Hist-soc 0 3,0 Hist-soc >2 4,9 Tot_source2 7,9 75,4 RefTot: <131 3,2 RefTot: >430 2,2 Theory_psych2 7,4 82,8 Psychoanalysis 0 1,4 Psychoanalysis >2 5,5 Theory_narr2 6,2 89,0 Share_SEC_FCC 6,0 95,1 FCC: 0-25% 2,9 Theory_text2 2,6 97,6 Theory_poco3 1,4 99,0 Theory_archmyth2 0,9 99,9 Theory_fem2 0,1 100,0
Second axis: FCC: 70-89% Upper-hand pole Textual >1; High ArchMyth >2; conformity to Narrative >10 recognized authorities Traditional and formalist types of theory
Second axis: Lower- hand pole Historicizing and sociological forms of Marxist >2; critique Hist-soc >2; Feminist >2; PoCo 1+
Second axis Traditional Formal vs Radical-critical Historical
Axis 2. Contributing variables and modalities Theory_poco3 17,0 PoCo: 1+ 11,8 PoCo: 0 5,2 Theory_histsoc2 14,8 31,8 Hist-soc >2 5,6 Hist-soc 0 9,0 Share_SEC_FCC 13,9 45,7 FCC: 26-39% 2,8 FCC: 70-89% 9,7 Theory_fem2 13,8 59,5 Feminist >2 8,9 Feminist 0 4,9 Theory_text2 12,6 72,1 Textual 0 4,9 Textual >1 7,7 Theory_archmyth2 9,1 81,2 ArchMyth 0 3,8 ArchMyth >2 4,3 Theory_Marx2 7,3 88,5 Marxist >2 4,9 Marxist 0 1,9 Theory_herm2 3,1 91,6 Theory_narr2 2,9 94,5 Theory_struct2 2,6 97,1 Theory_psych2 2,1 99,2 Tot_source2 0,5 99,7 Theory_other2 0,4 100,1
Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Temporal logic: Traditional, formalist text-based choices age Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Temporal logic: Traditional, formalist text-based choices literary period Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Temporal logic: Traditional, formalist text-based choices age of critics Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Institutional logic: Traditional, formalist text-based choices Universities Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Institutional logic: Traditional, formalist text-based choices Departments Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Gender logic: Traditional, formalist text-based choices individual gender Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Gender logic: choice Traditional, formalist text-based choices of author(s) Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Traditional, formalist Individual theorists text-based choices Poor Rich in in theory theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Merci
Questions?
Members of academies: Royal Academy of Science; Royal Academy of Letters; the Swedish Academy
French theorists, place of publication 70 60 50 40 Scandinavia 30 UK and US France All others 20 10 0
Swedish literary works Share of original titles published: 41% - 52% Corresponding proportion of reviews: ≈ 70% Table 1. Objects of study in literary dissertations National origin: Sweden 45% Europe 37% North America 8% Others 10%
5a. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FCFC, all (2283) Theorists only (627) TO, 20 diss or more (127) Top 30
5b. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US UK Germany France FCFC, all (2238) Theorists only (627) TO, 20 diss or more (127) Top 30
5c. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US UK Germany France FCFC, all (2238) Theorists only (627) TO, 20 diss or more (127) Top 30
5d. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US UK Germany France FCFC, all (2238) Theorists only (627) TO, 20 diss or more (127) Top 30
5e. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US UK Germany France FCFC, all (2238) Theorists only (627) TO, 20 diss or more (127) Top 30
Roland Barthes, 367 citations in 170 dissertations. 42% published in France, 58% elsewhere.
6. Citations to Bakhtin Circle, site of publication Scandinavia Other US 127 39 95 66 21 40 22 41 13 12 67 19 9 42 7 12 32 2 10 0 1980-85 1986-90 1991-95 1996-2000 2001-05
Distribution of citations to leading theorists • Slight overrepresentation in the core discipline (Departments of Litteraturvetenskap ) • Strong overrepresentation at Stockholm U • Exception: Bourdieu at Uppsala, postcolonial theory at Uppsala. • An ” effet de lieu .” Does this say anything about the autonomy of these practices?
8. Share of female critics cited among FCFC 0,25 0,70 0,20 0,60 0,50 0,15 0,40 Share of female- 0,10 authored dissertations, two-year 0,30 intervals 0,05 0,20 0,00
2. Feminist theorists, mean number of citations Dis iscipline Mean N, dis N, iss. Lit itte teraturvete tenskap 5,3 ,3 112 112 Eng ngelska 8 87 87 Fra ranska 3,8 ,8 18 18 Tyska 2,7 ,7 16 16 Övrigt 5,9 ,9 35 35 Tota otal 6 268 268
3. Percentage of female-authored dissertations citing foreign feminist theorists Dis iscipline % Lit itte teraturvete tenskap 45% 45% 69 69 of of 152 Eng ngelska 68% 68% 63 63 of of 92 Fra ranska 28 28% 11 11 of of 40 Tyska 38% 38% 13 13 of of 34 Övrigt 35% 35% 22 of 22 of 63 Tot otal 47% 47% 178 178 of of 381
Recommend
More recommend
