Russian journals on political science through the prism of bibliometric indicators

Russian journals on political science through the prism of bibliometric indicators


Avdonin V.S.,

Institute of Scientific information on Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, avdoninvla@mail.ru


elibrary_id: 646856 |

Meleshkina E.Yu.,

Institute of Scientific information on Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia, elenameleshkina@yandex.ru


elibrary_id: 192463 |

Article received: 2024.08.21 20:44. Accepted: 2024.11.08 20:44


DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2025.01.13
EDN: FKJIMW

Rubric: Laboratory

For citation:

Avdonin V.S., Meleshkina E.Yu. Russian journals on political science through the prism of bibliometric indicators. – Polis. Political Studies. 2025. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2025.01.13. EDN: FKJIMW (In Russ.)


The study was carried out within the framework of the state assignment of INION RAS “Current trends in the development of science in the context of social and information technology changes”.


Abstract

The article analyzes changes in bibliometric tools for assessing the activities of scientific journals and their role in maintaining and developing scientific communication in modern Russia using the example of political science journals, taking into account the political and scientific information context, as well as the specifics of the scientific discipline. The authors assess the impact of the new Science Index RINTS configuration on the structure of the rating of publications on political topics, and also consider the significance of other bibliometric indicators and expert assessments that are not included in the index. This issue is studied in the problematic field of changes in the external context of Russian science from the point of view of the concept of adaptation of science as a system to the conditions of the external environment, taking into account its relative autonomy. The article shows that changes in the Science Index generally show a tendency to preserve the internal autonomy of science. These changes were based on the motives of ensuring in the structure of the index the assessment of the qualitative level of scientific publications and the focus on taking into account their professionalism. The authors trace the general trend according to which the leading positions in the rating are occupied by the most famous professional journals associated with the institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the leading universities of the country. At the same time, the authors also draw attention to some controversial effects of the new version of the index, in particular, the underestimation of indicators indicating the “openness” of the journal to different authors and publications (the so-called “encapsulation” effects), as well as a number of other informative indicators available in the RSCI system. A conclusion is made about the strengths and weaknesses of the structural features of the index, as well as some specific features of the subject classification from the point of view of the tasks of adequately assessing the activities of scientific journals in political science and strengthening professional standards within the discipline.

Keywords
Russian political science, scientific communication, scientific journals, bibliometric indicators, Science Index, evaluation of scientific activity.


References

Aksnes, D. W., Langfeldt, L., & Wouters, P. (2019). Citations, citation indicators, and research quality: an overview of basic concepts and theories. Sage Open, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019829575

Aleskerov, F.T., Pislyakov, V., & Subochev, A. (2014). Ranking journals in economics, management and political science by social choice theory methods. Higher School of Economics Research Paper No. WP BRP 27/STI/2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2437850

Catalini, C., Lacetera, N., & Oettl, A. (2015). The incidence and role of negative citations in science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 13823-13826. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1502280112

Foerster, von H. (2002). Understanding understanding. Essays on Cybernetics and Cognition. New York: Inc Springer-Verlag.

Gel'man, V. (2015). Political science in Russia: scholarship without research? European Political Science, 14, 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2014.33

Gonzdlez-Pereira, B., Guerrero-Bote, V.P., & Moya-Aneg6n F. (2010). A new approach to the metric ofjournals’ scientific prestige. The SJR Indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 4(3), 379-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.03.002

Guerrero-Bote, V.P., & Moya-Aneg6n F. (2012). A further step forward in measuring journals’ scientific prestige: The SJR2 indicator. Journal of informetrics, 6(4), 674-688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi. 2012.07.001

Hirschman, A.O. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty: response to decline in firms, organizations, and states. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Ilyin, M., Malinova, O., & Patrushev, S. (2010). Political science in Russia: development of a profession. In R. Eisfeld, & L. Pal (Eds.), Political Science in Central-East Europe: Diversity and Convergence (pp. 131-150). Opladen: Barbara Budrich.

Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale Systeme. Grundrifi einer allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Marx, W., & Bornmann, L. (2015). On the causes of subject-specific citation rates in Web of Science. Scientometrics, 102, 1823-1827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1499-9

Spenser-Brown, G. (1972). Laws of form. New York: The Julian Press.

Stichweh, R. (1994). Wissenschaft, Universitat, Profession. Soziologische Analysen. Frankfurt a. Main: Suhrkamp.

Thornley, C., Watkinson, A., & Nicholas, D. et al. (2015). The role of trust and authority in the citation behaviour of researchers. Information Research. An International Electronic Journal, 20(3).

Waltman, L. (2016). A review of the literature on citation impact indicators. Journal of Informetrics, 10, 365-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. joi.2016.02.007

Zavadskaya, M., & Gerber, Th. (2023) Rise and fall: social science in Russia before and after the war. Post-Soviet Affairs, 39(1-2), 108-120.

Agafonov, Yu.G., & Sokolov, M.M. (2023). Russian Political Science in 2021: a survey. Polis. Political Studies, 2, 54-71. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2023.02.05.

Avdonin, V.S. (2015). Political science at the institutes of RAS: institutional dimension and scientometric indicators. Political Science (RU), 3, 27-52. (In Russ.)

Avdonin, V.S., & Meleshkina, E.Yu. (2016). Political science in the institutes of Russian academy of sciences in the light of an expert poll. Political Science (RU), 2, 232-247. (In Rus.)

Avdonin, V.S., & Meleshkina, E.Yu. (2019). What do ratings say? Political science journals in the RSCI system. Polis. Political Studies, 4, 69-88. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2019.04.06

Avdonin, V.S., & Meleshkina, E.Yu. (2020). Political science in journals: analysis of tools and indicators in information systems. Political Science, 1, 87-111. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31249/poln/2020.01.04

Balatsky, E.V., & Ekimova, N.A. (2015). The problem of manipulation in the RSCI system. Bulletin of Ural Federal University. Series Economics and Management, 14(2), 166-178. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2015.14.2.021

Borisov, N.A. (2023). Thirty years of post-soviet research in Russian political science: trends and prospects. Political Science, 4, 15-55. (In Russ.) http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.04.01

Borkin, L.J., & Saifitdinova, A.F. (2024). Scientometrics, assessment of scientific activities of scientists, and science policy in Russia. Biosfera, 16(1), 103-143. (In Russ.)

Fishman, L.G. (2008). The decay ofdemocracy and the “sunset” ofpolitical science. Politeia, 3, 79-88. (In Russ.)

Gaman-Golutvina, O.V., & Patrushev, S.V. (Eds.). (2018). Tendentsii i problemy razvitiya rossiiskoi politicheskoi nauki v mirovom kontekste: traditsiya, retseptsiya i novatsiya [Trends and problems of development of Russian political science in the global context: tradition, reception and innovation]. Moscow: Political Encyclopedia. (In Russ.)

Gelman, V.Ya. (2012). Political science and contemporary research on Russian politics: changes and challenges. Political Science, 1, 8-23. (In Russ.)

Luhmann, N. (2006). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft. (Russ. ed.: Luhmann, N. Obshchestvo obshchestva. IV. Differentsiatsiya. Moscow: Logos/Gnosis).

Maturana, H., & Varela, F. (1986). El Arbol del Conocimiento: Las Bases Biologicas del Conocer Humano (Russ. ed.: Maturana, H., & Varela, F. Drevo poznaniya: biologicheskie korni chelovecheskogo ponimaniya. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya).

Melville, A.Yu. (2024). New challenges for political science. Political Science (RU), 2, 16-36. (In Russ.) http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2024.02.01

Political science in Russia: yesterday, today, tomorrow (Materials of a scholarly seminar) (2006). Polis. Political Studies, 1, 141-156. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2006.01.11

Prigozhine, I., & Stengers, I. (1986). Order out of chaos. Man's new dialogue with nature. (Russ. ed.: Prigozhine, I., & Stengers, I. Poryadok iz khaosa. Novyi dialog cheloveka s prirodoi. Moscow: Progress).

Rastorguev, S.V., & Parma, R.V. (2023). Reflection of modern politics: current research agenda in leading Russian journals on political science. Political Science (RU), 4, 56-80. (In Russ.) http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.04.02

Shatilov, A.B. (2022). Russian political science: is it the time for modernization and nationalization? Vlast', 4, 9-14. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31171/vlast.v30i4.9116

Sudakova, A.E., & Sandler, D.G. (2022). Institutional monopoly of the higher education system: national and regional level. Ekonomika regiona / Economy of Regions, 18(4), 1135-1152. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17059/ekon.reg.2022-4-12

Sungurov, A.Yu., & Kiseleva, D.A. (2023). Pro-governmental think tanks factories in modern Russia: a functional approach. Political Science (RU), 4, 155-185. (In Russ.) http://www.doi.org/10.31249/poln/2023.04.06

Vorobyov, D.M. (2004). Development of political science community in post-Soviet Russia. Polis. Political Studies, 6, 151-161. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2004.06.19

Zharova, E.N. (2022). Scientometrics in the sociohumanistic sciences: problems and solutions. Scientific and Technical Libraries, 4, 34-53. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33186/1027-3689-2022-4-34-53

Content No. 1, 2025

See also:


Avdonin V.S., Meleshkina E.Yu.,
What do Ratings Say? Political Science Journals in the RSCI System. – Polis. Political Studies. 2019. No4

Romanova M.D.,
Influence of Cultural Context on Formation of Science Policy (French Experience). – Polis. Political Studies. 2015. No5

Yeremenko G.O., Kokarev K.P.,
eLibrary.ru and Russian Science Citation Index in the information infrastructure of russian science: conversation with Gennadiy Yeremenko, Director General, eLibrary.ru. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No1

Istomin I.A.,
Assessment of Scientific Productivity and Social Utility of Scientific Studies: The Lessons from the U.S. Record. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No6

Savinov L.V.,
Russian political science and its scientometrical characteristics. – Polis. Political Studies. 2012. No3

 

   

Introducing an article



Polis. Political Studies
3 2002


Information
Russian Conservatism: as Discussed by Young Scientists

 The article text (Электронная версия)
 

Archive

   2024      2023      2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991