No abstract

Today´s connected world allows people to gather information in shorter intervals than ever before, widely monitored by massive online data sources. As a dramatic economic event, recent financial crisis increased public interest for large companies considerably. In this paper, we exploit this change in information gathering behavior by utilizing Google query volumes as a "bad news" indicator for each corporation listed in the Standard and Poor´s 100 index. Our results provide not only an investment strategy that gains particularly in times of financial turmoil and extensive losses by other market participants, but reveal new sectoral patterns between mass online behavior and (bearish) stock market movements. Based on collective attention shifts in search queries for individual companies, hence, these findings can help to identify early warning signs of financial systemic risk. However, our disaggregated data also illustrate the need for further efforts to understand the influence of collective attention shifts on financial behavior in times of regular market activities with less tremendous changes in search volumes.

Education entails conflicting perspectives about its subject matter. In the late 1980s, the conflict developed into a war between interpretive and causal paradigms. Did the confrontation result in a balance between these warring sides? We use text analysis to identify research trends in 137,024 dissertation abstracts from 1980 to 2010 and relate these to students’ academic employment outcomes. Topics associated with the interpretive approach rose in popularity, while the outcomes-oriented paradigm declined. Academic employment remained stably associated with topics in the interpretive approach, but their effect is moderated by the prestige of the students’ institutions. The relation between topic popularity and employability provides insight into field change and how the benefits of cultural shifts fall along the lines of institutional power.

No abstract

Zusammenfassung Wir schlagen eine feldtheoretische Erweiterung der HabitusFeldtheorie auf die Ebene der Weltgesellschaft vor. Zu diesem Zweck analysieren wir einen integrierten Datensatz auf Länderebene (n = 181 Staaten) aus verschiedenen Feldern mit Hilfe einer multiplen Faktorenanalyse. Wir zeigen, dass das globale Feld der Macht über zwei Dimensionen beschrieben werden kann: Meta-Kapital und interne Funktionalität. Insbesondere die Dimension der internen Funktionalität von Staaten kann dabei einen wertvollen analytischen Bezugsrahmen für die vergleichende (Umfrage-)Forschung liefern.Abstract We propose a field-theoretical elaboration of the habitus-field-theory towards the level of the 'world-society'. For this purpose we analyze an integrated data set from different social fields on country level (n = 181 countries) applying multiple factor analysis. We demonstrate that the global field of power can be described by two dimensions: meta-capital and internal functionality. Especially internal functionality can provide a valuable analytical frame of reference for comparative (survey) research.

We investigate how sociology students garner recognition from niche field audiences through specialization. Our dataset comprises over 80,000 sociology-related dissertations completed at U.S. universities, as well as data on graduates’ pursuant publications. We analyze different facets of how students specialize—topic choice, focus, novelty, and consistency. To measure specialization types within a consistent methodological frame, we utilize structural topic modeling. These measures capture specialization strategies used at an early career stage. We connect them to a crucial long-term outcome in academia: becoming an advisor. Event-history models reveal that specific topic choices and novel combinations exhibit a positive influence, whereas focused theses make no substantial difference. In particular, theses related to the cultural turn, methods, or race are tied to academic careers that lead to mentorship. Thematic consistency of students’ publication track also has a strong positive effect on the chances of becoming an advisor. Yet, there are diminishing returns to consistency for highly productive scholars, adding important nuance to the well-known imperative of publish or perish in academic careers.

This article describes patterns of scientific growth that emerge in response to major research accomplishments in instrumentation and the discovery of new matter. Using two Nobel Prize‐winning contributions, the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) and the discovery of Buckminsterfullerenes (BUF), we examine the growth of follow‐up research via citation networks at the author and subdiscipline level. A longitudinal network analysis suggests that structure, cohesiveness, and interdisciplinarity vary considerably with the type of breakthrough and over time. Scientific progress appears to be multifaceted, including not only theoretical advances but also the discovery of new instrumentation and new matter. In addition, we argue that scientific growth does not necessarily lead to the formation of new specialties or new subdisciplines. Rather, we observe the emergence of a research community formed at the intersection of subdisciplinary boundaries.

We map the topic structure of psychology utilizing a sample of over 500,000 abstracts of research articles and conference proceedings spanning two decades (1995–2015). To do so, we apply structural topic models to examine three research questions: (i) What are the discipline’s most prevalent research topics? (ii) How did the scientific discourse in psychology change over the last decades, especially since the advent of neurosciences? (iii) And was this change carried by high impact (HI) or less prestigious journals? Our results reveal that topics related to natural sciences are trending, while their ’counterparts’ leaning to humanities are declining in popularity. Those trends are even more pronounced in the leading outlets of the field. Furthermore, our findings indicate a continued interest in methodological topics accompanied by the ascent of neurosciences and related methods and technologies (e.g. fMRI’s). At the same time, other established approaches (e.g. psychoanalysis) become less popular and indicate a relative decline of topics related to the social sciences and the humanities.