A British Connection? A Quantitative Analysis of the Changing Relations between American, British and Canadian Sociologists

Abstract

Is Canadian sociology facing a crisis? Depending on one's point of view and temperament, one can always provide arguments for comfort or alarm. Although we recognize that some debates are difficult, if not impossible to settle, we are also convinced that most questions framed in terms of "crisis" are unfalsifiable and particularly ill-suited for constructive analysis, and can easily lead to tavernlike discussions and grandiose pronouncements. McLaughlin's recent discussions of Canadian sociology's future (McLaughlin, 2004(McLaughlin, , 2005(McLaughlin, , 2006) and the debate they have fuelled provide an illustration of such artificial polemics created by an inadequate formulation of the question and insufficient methodologies to provide an answer.McLaughlin emphasizes the institutional weakness of the Canadian sociological tradition. This institutional weakness would be a reflection of Canadian sociology's historical connections to the kind of social sciences practiced in the United-Kingdom and consequently explains its meagre appeal to the American scientific field (McLaughlin, 2004 and. Assuming that British sociology is a "weakly institutionalized discipline" and that Canadian sociology is excessively embedded within this British tradition, it should surprise no one that McLaughlin concludes that "this has hurt the development of a strong sociological perspective in Canada" (McLaughlin, 2004: 89). Combined with two other major factors -the "flatness' or non-hierarchical nature of the Canadian education system and the left-wing orientation of Canadian sociology (McLaughlin, 2004) -the "British flavour" pervading Canadian universities has not only hampered the development of a "distinct and

The Institution of Sociological Theory in Canada

“…In the U.S. context, recent debates have questioned the purpose and relevance of “theory” to a sociological education, and further, what this means for the role and function of the “theorist” within the discipline (Lamont ; Lizardo ). At the same time, ongoing debates seek to define what a Canadian sociology should stand for in comparison to its American or European neighbors, and the theoretical orientation that ought to guide the practices of Canadian‐based sociologists (Gingras and Warren ). The debates about intellectual cohesion and fragmentation have been ongoing for decades, and demonstrate no signs of nearing a clear resolution.…”

Canadian Foreign Policy: A Linguistically Divided Field

“…It is interesting to note that Gingras and Warren observed an identical phenomenon among Canadian sociologists. English-language sociologists ignore almost completely articles published in France (1.4% of their citations) and Quebec (0.7%), whereas this is not true of the sociologists from Quebec-French universities (respectively 10.8 and 3.1 % of the citations) (2006: 519).…”

A Troubling Presence: Indigeneity in English‐Language Canadian Sociology

“…We believe our approach in this journal analysis allows us to capture the single best snapshot of the discipline's core research practices and status hierarchies, an accepted practice in the sociology of sociology. Other researchers have compared the two journals in terms of their relative status as measured by citations in American sociology journals (Baer 2005), impact factors (Haggerty 2007), gender equality of authors (Carroll et al 1992), and national origin of authors (Gingras and Warren 2006). Furthermore, the Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology (CRSA) has been used to compare level of "positivism" in different national sociologies (Gartrell and Gartrell 1996).…”