Studies of scientific authorship have been developing for forty years. This phenomenon is becoming increasingly well documented. However, most of these studies deal with fields considered in only one national context. This article tries to understand the specific modalities of sociological authorship within two national contexts: the United States and France. The analysis yields an understanding of the logic intimately linking texts and contexts, throwing light not only on the way research and authorship practices are partly shaped by their particular institutional and historical contexts but also on the interactions between cognitive content and patterns of publication.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alpert, H. 1955. The social sciences and the National Science Foundation: 1945-1955. American Sociological Review20 (6): 653-60.
2.
American National Standards Institute. 1979. American national standard for the preparation of scientific papers for written or oral presentation. New York: American National Standards Institute.
3.
American Sociological Association. 1997. American Sociological Association style guide. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association.
4.
Amiot, M. 1986. Contre l’Etat les sociologues. Paris: Ecole des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales.
5.
Bazerman, C. 1988. Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
6.
Beaver, D., and R. Rosen. 1978. Studies in scientific collaboration: Part I. The professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics1 (1): 65-84.
7.
—. 1979a. Studies in scientific collaboration: Part II. Scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799-1830. Scientometrics1 (2): 133-49.
8.
—. 1979b. Studies in scientific collaboration: Part III. Professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics1 (3): 231-45.
9.
Ben-David, J. 1991. Scientific growth: Essays on the social organization and ethos of science. Berkeley: University of California Press.
10.
Biderman, A.D., and E.T. Crawford. 1970. Paper-money: Trends of research sponsorship in American sociology journals. Social Science Information9 (1): 51-77.
11.
Bulmer, M. 1981. Quantification and Chicago social science in the 1920s: A neglected tradition. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences17: 312-31.
12.
Camic, C., and Y. Xie. 1994. The statistical turn in American social science: Columbia university, 1890 to 1915. American Sociological Review59 (6): 773-805.
13.
Chapoulie, J.-M. 1991. La seconde fondation de la sociologie française, les Etats-Unis et la classe ouvrière. Revue Française de Sociologie32 (3): 321-61.
14.
Chenu, A. 1998. La non-professionnalisation de la sociologie française. Les sociologues, l’université de masse et le marché de l’emploi. Paper presented at the international conference of the ISA, Montréal, Canada, 26 July to 1 August.
15.
Chubin, D.E. 1975. The journal as a primary data source in the sociology of science: With some observations from sociology. Social Science Information14 (1): 157-68.
16.
Clark, T.N. 1998. Clientelism and universalism: Columbia sociology under Merton and Lazarsfeld. In Paul Lazarsfeld 1901-1976. La sociologie de Vienne à New York, edited by B.-P. Lecuyer and J. Lautman. Paris: L’Harmathan.
17.
Dear, P., ed. 1991. The literary structure of scientific argument: Historical studies. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
18.
Drouard, A. 1982. Réflexions sur une chronologie: Le développement des sciences sociales en France de 1945 à la fin des années soixante. Revue Française de Sociologie23 (1): 55-85.
19.
Edge, D. 1979. Quantitative measures of communication in science: A critical review. History of Science17: 102-34.
20.
Endersby, J.W. 1996. Collaborative research in the social sciences: Multiple authorship and publication credit. Social Science Quarterly77 (2): 375-92.
21.
Farrugia, F. 1999. Généalogie d’une professionnalisation: La sociologie française de 1945 à 1960. L’Homme et la Société131: 23-42.
22.
Gerson, E.M. 1983. Scientific work and social worlds. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization4 (3): 357-77.
23.
Glenn, N.D. 1971. American sociologists’ evaluation of sixty-three journals. American Sociologist6 (4): 298-303.
24.
Hargens, L. 1991. Impressions and misimpressions about sociology journals. Contemporary Sociology20: 343-49.
25.
Heffner, A.G. 1981. Funded research, multiple authorship, and subauthorship collaboration in four disciplines. Scientometrics3 (1): 5-12.
26.
Jenkins, W.I., and I. Velody. 1970. The social sciences and government: Do the natural sciences show the prescribed path? Social Science Information9 (5): 91-118.
27.
Katz, J.S., and B.R. Martin. 1997. What is research collaboration? Research Policy26 (1): 1-18.
28.
Lepenies, W. 1988. Between literature and science: The rise of sociology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29.
McCartney, J.L. 1970. On being scientific: Changing styles of presentation of sociological research. American Sociologist5 (1): 30-35.
30.
—. 1971. The financing of sociological research: Trends and consequences. In The phenomenon of sociology, edited by E.A. Tiryakian, 384-97. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
31.
Mendras, H. 1995. Comment devenir sociologue. Souvenirs d’un vieux mandarin. Paris: Actes Sud.
32.
Mucchielli, L. 1998. La découverte du social: Naissance de la sociologie en France (1870-1914). Paris: La Découverte.
33.
Oromaner, M. 1974. The impact of sponsored and non-sponsored publication in sociology. American Sociologist9 (1): 36-39.
34.
—. 1975. Collaboration and impact: The career of multi-authored publications. Social Science Information14 (1): 147-55.
35.
Patel, N. 1972. Quantitative and collaborative trends in American sociological research. American Sociologist7 (1): 5-6.
36.
—. 1973. Collaboration in the professional growth of American sociology. Social Science Information12 (6): 77-92.
37.
Perrucci, R., K. O’Flaherty, and H. Marshall. 1983. Market conditions, productivity and promotion among university faculty. Research in Higher Education19: 431-49.
38.
Piriou, O. 1999. La sociologie: Métier ou profession? Quand les sociologues prennent position sur l’exercice de la sociologie. L’Homme et la Société131: 43-64.
39.
Pollak, M. 1976. La planification des sciences sociales. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales2/3: 105-21.
40.
—. 1979. Paul F. Lazarsfeld, fondateur d’une multinationale scientifique. Actes de la Recherche en Sciences Sociales25: 45-59.
41.
Pontille, David. 2000a. Figures de la signature scientifique. Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie109: 283-316.
42.
—. 2000b. La signature scientifique: Espaces d’inscription et mises en ordre. Ph.D. dissertation, Département de Sociologie, Université Toulouse II, Toulouse, France.
43.
Price, D.J. 1963. Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
44.
Ross, D. 1991. The origins of American social science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Sainsaulieu, R. 1988. La profession de sociologue en France. In Les champs de la sociologie française, edited by H. Mendras and M. Verret, 247-56. Paris: Armand-Colin.
46.
Shanas, E. 1945. The American Journal of Sociology through fifty years. American Journal of Sociology50: 522-33.
47.
Simpson, R.L. 1961. Expanding and declining fields in American sociology. American Sociological Review26 (3): 458-66.
48.
Strauss, A. 1982. Social worlds and legitimation processes. In Studies in symbolic interaction, edited by N. Denzin, 171-90. Greenwich, CT: JAI.
49.
Turner, S.P., and J.H. Turner. 1990. The impossible science: An institutional analysis of American sociology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
50.
Wanderer, J.J. 1966. Academic origins of contributors to the American Sociological Review. American Sociologist1 (5): 241-43.
51.
Wieviorka, M. 1996. Postface: La sociologie sous tension. Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie101: 319-32.
52.
Wiley, N. 1979. Recent journal sociology: The substitution of method for theory. Contemporary Sociology8: 793-99.
53.
Wilner, P. 1985. The main drift of sociology between 1936 and 1982. History of Sociology5 (2): 1-20.
54.
Wolfe, A. 1990. Books vs. articles: Two ways of publishing sociology. Sociological Forum5 (3): 466-89.
55.
Yoels, W.C. 1971. Destiny or dynasty: Doctoral origins and appointment patterns of editors of the American Sociological Review. American Sociologist6 (2): 134-39.
56.
—. 1974. The structure of fields and the allocation of editorships on scientific journals: Some observations on the politics of knowledge. Sociological Quarterly15: 264-76.
57.
Zuckerman, H.A. 1965. Nobel laureates: Sociological studies of scientific collaboration. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Sociology, Columbia University, New York.
