论文标题
当代定量研究中科学领域跨科学领域的方法论学
Methodological monotheism across fields of science in contemporary quantitative research
论文作者
论文摘要
研究团队多样性对科学进步的重要性得到了广泛的强调。尽管假设检验在现代定量研究中看似霸权的作用,但很少关注定量方法的多样性,这是由线性模型分析框架体现的。使用科学网络的文献计量数据,我们对1990年至2022年基于线性模型的研究的流行率进行了大规模和跨学科评估。绝对术语,线性模型在所有科学领域都广泛使用。相对,三种模式表明线性模型是社会科学中的霸权模型。首先,基于线性模型的研究的流行率很高。其次,基于线性模型的研究患病率与知识生产中全球不平等的全球模式保持一致。第三,直到2012年,关于文章的引文数量,并且在整个期间至少有一个引用方面,基于线性模型的研究一直存在引用溢价。先前的研究表明,这些模式的融合可能对社会科学有害,因为它可能使理论与线性模型的框架不相容地边缘化,从而降低了有关社会现象的叙事多样性,并阻止了创新和破坏性的研究,从而限制了研究的广度。
The importance of research teams' diversity for the progress of science is highlighted extensively. Despite the seemingly hegemonic role of hypothesis testing in modern quantitative research, little attention has been devoted to the diversity of quantitative methods, epitomized by the linear model framework of analysis. Using bibliometric data from the Web of Science, we conduct a large-scale and cross-disciplinary assessment of the prevalence of linear-model-based research from 1990 to 2022. In absolute terms, linear models are widely used across all fields of science. In relative terms, three patterns suggest linear models are hegemonic among Social Sciences. First, there is a high and growing prevalence of linear-model-based research. Second, global patterns of linear-model-based research prevalence align with global inequalities in knowledge production. Third, there was a citation premium to linear-model-based research until 2012 for articles' number of citations and for the entire period in terms of having at least one citation. Previous research suggests that the confluence of these patterns may be detrimental to the Social Sciences as it potentially marginalizes theories incompatible with the linear models' framework, lowers the diversity of narratives about social phenomena, and prevents innovative and path-breaking research, limiting the breadth of research.