Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1694841190717.pdf (Liberia)
Nordic Impact: Article Productivity and Citation Patterns in Sixteen Nordic Sociology Departments Thoroddiir 12jnrnnson"2 and Inga Dora S i g f i ~ s d o t t i r ~ ~ ~ 'University at Albany, SUNY, USA, 'Icelandic Centre for Social Research and Analysis.

Iceland.
Iceland.

and 3Pennsylvania State University, USA ABSTRACT The sociology departments in the Nordic countries provide the institutional platform for Nordir Sociology and for the Nordic national sociological associations that form the Scandinavian Sociological Association.

This paper focuses on journal articles produced by current (as of 1 January 2001) faculty of 16 of these Nordic Sociology departments in the period 1981-2000.
First, xve proride a brief overview of article productivity and citations to articles produced in this period by country and department.

Second.

we estimate a multilevel model of citation patterns by articles published.

the academic position and productivity of each author, and the structure and protluctirity of each tlepartment as a whole.

Third.

we test the extent to which the effects of such factors differ between departments and individuals.

In all departments.
In all departments.

publications in high- impact journals increase the number of citations to any given article, to other work of thc same author, and to the work of other faculty in the department.

The effect of publishing in high- impact journals differs significantly between individual authors.

and work in certain types of journals yields more citations than the journal impact factor ~vould predict.
\\'e argue that departmental affiliations with outside faculty and departmental productivity can be seen as a form of social capital that benefits both individuals and departments as a whole.

These findings strongly suggest that diversity is a defining characteristic of this sociological community, precluding monolithic definitions of Nordic sociology.

1.

Introduction Nordic sociology is a complex concept with various cultural, geographical, political a n d academic connotations.
From a n individual perspective, Nordic sociology could for instance be alternatirely defined in terms of the ethnicity, residence, research sites o r theoretical orienta- tion of its practitioners.

From an organizational perspective, Nordic sociology could similarly be defined in terms of the departments of sociology in the Nordic countries, o r t h e national socio- logical associations that form t h e Scandinavian Sociological Association.
These alternative defi- nitions are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but they draw t h e boundaries of Nordic sociology somewhat differently a n d emphasize different qualities of this diwrse sociological entity.

The archetypal Nordic sociologist might be seen to be drawn from a Nordic pool of culture a n d genes, educated and employed at a Nordic sociology department.

and studying Nordic societies from a uniquely Nordic theoretical perspective.
Howerer, numerous sociologists in the Nordic countries are not Nordic by origin.

a n d m a n y sociologists of Nordic origin are educated o r employed abroad.

Furthermore.

several sociologists at Nordic departments of sociology have chosen foreign countries as their 254 A a A SOCIOLOGICA 2002 VOLUME 4 j primary topic of investigation.

Conversely, the study of Nordic countries is actirely pursued at various foreign institutions by researchers who are not Nordic by origin.
Finally, several important sociological contributions hare been made by Nordic scholars who are neither sociologists by training nor by occupation.

L i l t erna t ively, Allard t As an academic field, Nordic sociology can be viewed as centered on certain theoretical or empirical core themes.

For instance.
For instance.

Bertilsson and Therborn (2000) argue that the sociology of Nordic countries is based on a distinctive moral philosophy, developed in a dynamic relationship with the growth of the welfare ( 19 8 9, 1 9 9 5) st ate.

argues that the pursuit of sociology in the Nordic countries can be defined by broad topical interests, including welfare research, stratifica- tion research, women’s studies and cultural studies, where neighboring and kindred cases provide a strong basis for comparison.
These definitions of the core of Nordic sociology raise important issues regarding the role of national and geographical communities and the nature of sociology as an international enterprise.

These various definitional difficulties may in part account for the paucity of sociological studies of similarities and differences in the ‘Nordic’ pursuit of sociology.

As \Vallerstein (1998) points out, the ‘internationalization’ of sociology has been a slow and uneven process.
It has long ‘been acknowledged that the growth of sociology has been shaped by national ideals.

social and political values, and accepted patterns of social organization (hlazur 1963; Uourdieu & Pas- seron 1967; Szczepanski 1969; Thorlindsson 1982).

The discipline has from the outset been divided along national lines (Levine 1995).

and the development of ‘national sociologies’ was an integral part of nation building in many the 20th century.
throughout countries Furthermore, the establishment of multina- tional sociological associations has been closely related to the restructuring of political and economic boundaries.

Thus, the foundation of the Scandinavian Sociological Association in the early 1950s coincided with the establish- ment of the Nordic Council, aimed at promoting political, cultural and economic collaboration among the Nordic countries.

Similarly.
Similarly.

the European Sociological Association was founded with the twin aims of facilitating specifically European sociological research and giving sociology a voice in European affairs (ESA 2001).

In such endeavours.

the spectre of iimeri- can sociology’ is occasionally summoned to galvanize European sociologists around supra- national academic identities.

Historically, how- ever.


the sociological communities on both sides of the Atlantic have dei~eloped similar nietho- dological and theoretical fault lines, which have proven a significantly greater barrier to aca- dcmic discourse than the continental divide.

For instance.

a review of Le Suicide appeared in the Aiiiericaii J o i ~ i ~ n J of Sociology within months of the book‘s publication (Tosti 1898).

drawing an immediate response from Professor Durkheim (1898) in a following issue of the journal.
In sharp contrast, the French Emile Durkheim and the German hlax IVeber n e w - cited eacfi another, and irere apparently niutually un- aware of each other’s work.

Four decades later, the golden age of functionalism, putatively the epitome of iimerican sociology’, was ushered in by Talcott Parsons’ (1937) Stnrctirrc of Social Action, subtitled A Study iiz Social Tlieory with Spccirrl Re~crcrice to n Grolrp of Rereiil Ezrro~icarl IVriters.

In contemporary sociology.


the affinity of Americans and Europeans sharing a common theoretical or empirical orientation in general far surpasses the level of integration of their respective geographical sociological commu- nities.

The foundation of the Scandinavian Socio- logical Association in the 1950s provided the institutional basis for the fledgling field of Nordic sociology.
At the time, there was only a handful of sociologists working within each country, and none of the countries had established their own national journals of sociology.

The decision to launch Actrr Sociologicn in 1955 as an English- language sociology journal was motivated by a strategy of pooling the sociological resources of each country and launching Nordic sociology into the international arena (Agersnap 6r Widerberg 1995; Allardt 1995).
Almost half 11 century later, the socio- logical landscapc has been profoundly trans- formed.

On the national level, each of the Nordic countries boasts of a thriving socio- logical community, capable of sustaining a vibrant local discourse.

and in most cases publishing a journaI in its own language.

On the international level.


several general socio- logical and specialized academic societies pro- vide forums for Nordic sociologists to interact with colleagues from around the globe, and the associated proliferation of specialty journals has provided important outlets for disseniinat- ing Nordic research to the international com- Productivity and Impact 255 niunity.
In this rapidly changing intellectual landscape, it is important to assess the current status and the future prospects of the project of 'Nordic sociology'.

The pursuit of sociology is fundamentally a global enterprise.

and as Allardt (1995) has pointed out, the impact of Nordic sociologists in international sociology is integral to the mean- ingful pursuit of Nordic sociology.
We believe that 'Nordic sociology' should not be seen as a rigidly defined institution, but rather as a loose global network of scholars, concentrated around the Nordic countries.

The sociology departments at the different Nordic universities do, hoiwrer.

form the backbone of this sonie- what amorphous entity.

Each department tends to have a distinct intellectual identity, contribut- ing to both the national sociological communi- ties and the Nordic community of sociologists.
Engaging sociologists in non-Nordic countries in dialogue should be seen a s vital to the fruitful developinent of Nordic sociology.

International influences in Nordic sociology should therefore be vieived positively, insofar as they contribute to the Nor<ic sociological discourse.

The extent to which Nordic sociologists yield a reciprocal impact on international sociology is a n equally important issue.
and national and departmental patterns of such impact are central to the future prospects of Nordic sociology.

Piiblirntioii pnttcrns ia roiiteiiiyornrg sociologg The dissemination of facts and ideas forms the basis of any academic endeavor, and the publication process is integral to such commu- nication (Cleniens et al.

1995: Persson et al.

1897).

The format of publications has, however, traditionally differed across academic disciplines (Persson 19S5).
Scientists the natural sciences have priniarily published their research findings in peer-reviewed journals, while books and monographs have been much more pre- valent in the humanities.

in In sociology, by design straddling the divide between the natural sciences and the huniani- ties, scholars have been somewhat divided between these two forms of publication (Clem- ens et al.

1995).
1995).

Both formats have been important to the global pursuit of sociology the discipline, each from the inception of having its distinct set of advantages and dis- advantages.

The book format alloivs ii broader scope of theoretical and empirical investigation.

and can appeal to a broader audience.

In contrast, the academic journal provides a forum for a more focused exchange of ideas and research findings.

and tends to serve a more specialized audience.


The academic publication process is in the midst of profound technological and organiza- tional transformation that has affected the review process of books and journal articles in different ways.

The vast opportunities for loiv- cost desktop and electronic publications have led to a n exponential growth in the number of book titles and journals published.
The formid- able international publishing houses hare increasingly taken over the publication and marketing of both academic books and aca- demic journals from university presses and professional associations.

IVhile the interna- tional mass marketing of certain book titles may in some cases shift the review process from academic concerns to market research, desktop book publishing evades the review process altogether.
In contrast, the recent proliferation of specialty journals and diminishing restric- tions on frequency and volume of journals hare increased rather than decreased the importance of the academic review process.

IVith the market for journal subscriptions largely limited to university libraries and a professional audi- ence, the academic reputation of journals has become a market premium.

with a particular journal having a known rate of acceptance and a measurable impact in the academic comniu- nity.
In recent years, studies have revealed a dramatic change in publication practices in all academic fields.

In particular, in fields that traditionally have emphasized book publica- tions, a n increasing ratio of scholars is now publishing journal articles (Olsen 1998).

Aca- demic journals carry out the two most impor- tant aspects of the scientific endeavor: the distribution of knowledge and the assessment of the knowledge being distributed.
The journal review process subjects manuscripts to, the critical evaluation of other members of the academic communitp, and the academic journal thus assumes particular responsibility in guar- anteeing the quality of methods and the contribution of results to the discipline.

The rejection rate of manuscripts submitted to the most prestigious sociology journals is over 80 per cent, but each manuscript published in such journals can be expected to draw multiple citations (Persson 1985).

In contrast.
In contrast.

struggling journals may need to accept much of the material submitted, and the chance of citations in other work may be minimal. '

25G ACTA SOCIOLOGICA 2002 I'OLUSIE 4 5 Cifnfioiis ns n iitcnsiire of scholnrlg itripact The heated debate over the validity of counts of article publications and citations as measures of productivity and quality of scholarly work rages on among sociologists on both sides of the Atlantic (e.g.

Cronin et al.
Cronin et al.

1997; Baldi 1998; Braun 1999; Anderssen 2000; IIargens 2000; Heine 2000; IllcGarthy 2000).

For instance, Brante and Sunesson (1990) argue that citation indexes are useless, since they exclude books and only selectively cover academic journals.

Furthermore.

they claim that citations do not accurately reflect the importance of specific journal articles.
since citation practices differ widely across substantive areas: the importance of work may only be realized after the death of its author; and substandard work may draw many negative citations.

Sonic of these objections apply to socio- logical reputations in general.

\Vhatever post- humous fame the future may bring, currently neglectcd work not only remains uncited, but by in contemporary definition has no impact sociology.
Similarly, infaniy may be a sure route to academic hme, regardless of citation counts.

However, work drawing a large number is most likely to be of negative citations controversial rather than simply substandard, since poor quality alone may not draw much attention in contemporary sociology Finally.

like other indicators of academic prestige, citation patterns may reflect the fact that academic careers are grounded in networks of scholars (Baldi 1998; Hargens 2000).
The selective coverage of citation indexes may represent 11 more serious problem.

The most commonly used Social Scieiice Citritioii Irides (SSCI; IS1 2002a) does include citations to both books and non-indescd journals.

How- ever, such citations are only counted if they have appeared in an indexed journal.

For instance, while, Sociologisk I:orskaing and Ti& skriftfor- Srirr~iririsfor-skrii~Ig are included in SSCI.

the Finnish journal Sosiologia and the Icelandic journal Islerisk 7:elagsr-it are not.
This is in a sense a reflection of the challenges facing national sociology journals in smaller linguistic areas.

Articles publishcd in such journals will only ciiter global sociology when cited in an international forum.

Tlrc rrrrrcnt starly As discussed above, sociological importance is a niultifnceted construct with many different indicators.

Nevertheless, the contribution of sociologists to the discipline can in part be gauged from the attention their work receives in international journals.
Article citations are influenced by a variety of factors, including the area and impact of the journals, the reputation and productivity of authors, and structure and culture of academic communities.

Specialty journals have become increas- ingly important in sociology in the past few decades, and their impact in many cases exceeds that of the top-tier general sociology journals (IS1 199s).
Hoivever, the number of citations to articles published in such outlets will depend in part upon the volume, structure and activity of the sociological communities that they serve.

Furthermore, the prestige of both specialty journals and general sociology journals differs substantially.

The processes contributing to the prestige of academic journals closely parallel the processes contributing to the reputations of scholars.
Academic journals are embedded in complex networks of institutions and scholarly communities.

The avcrage number of citations to articles they publish is not the only indicator of their quality, but it gauges the impact that the journal has in the discipline.

Articles published in a high-impact journal are more visible and have a n increased potential for influencing the discipline.
The work of scholars with a reputation for originality and quality may draw more citations than the work of lesser known authors.

Prolific scholars who publish their work in highly visible journals also earn a centrality in their field that in turn increases the number of citations to their work.

Furthemiore.

scholarly reputations are grounded in social networks and interact with publication patterns and academic positions.
Thus, a professorship in sociology may require both a strong publication record and a strong academic reputation.

Hoivever.

holding a senior position in the field will in turn contribute to increased prestige and productivity.

On the departmental level, senior faculty may enhance the stature of their programs in various ways (Sigfusdottir & Thorlindsson 2000).

They contribute to the reputation of the department as a whole, and they may be instrumental in promoting the work of their colleagues.
Similarly, outside faculty affiliated with the department provide additional ties to other departments and the discipline as a whole.

In addition.

larger departnients and depart- ments with a strong culture of publication and collaboration can generate exciting arenas of academic challenges and industriousness.

Productivity and Impact 257 The current study contributes to the under- standing of Nordic.

sociology in several ways.


First, we seek to describe the efforts of Nordic sociologists to disseminate their work through the publication of articles in indexed journals.

Second.

we evaluate the impact of such articles, as measured by citations in other articles appearing in indexed journals.

Third, we for- mally assess the relative influence of publication outlets, authors and departmental characteris- tics on the number of citations that each article has received.
Finally, we explore the extent to which the importance of such factors varies between the Nordic sociology departments and the Nordic sociologists included in our study.

2 .
2 .

RIcthods and data Our data included information on journal article publications and citations in 16 of the Nordic sociology departments.’ Specifically, we studied (1) journal articles (2) indexed in SSCI or Sociologicnl Abstrncts (SA) (3) appearing in the period 1981-2000, (4) authored by uni- versity faculty (5) at Nordic sociology depart- ments (6) that train graduate students.

As a result, niaiiy Nordic sociologists were not included in the analysis.
such as researchers and teachers who do not hold a faculty position, graduate students, faculty at undergraduate departments and those working in non-aca- demic settings.

Similarly, the analysis excluded books, book chapters.

reports, lecturcs, non- indexed journal articles and indexed articles published prior to 1981, as ~ t ~ e l l as work by faculty no longer associated with a department as of 1 January 2001.
Departftieiits mid fariilty Information on faculty at 16 Nordic sociology departnients was obtained from the university web pages of each sociology department.

The various academic titles used for full-time faculty in these five countries were classified into four broad categories.

The category of ‘Professor’ corresponds to ‘Full Professor’.

‘Chair of Sociol- ogy‘ and other labels denoting the highest faculty position in each department.
‘Other Faculty’ refers to other full-time faculty with responsibilities for both teaching and research within each department.

The formal definitions of these career stages vary substantially between countries, but correspond roughly to i\ssistant Professor’ and iissociate Professor’ at various English-speaking universities.
The cate- gory of iiffliated Faculty’ denotes formally affiliated full-time faculty with teaching and research responsibilities at other departments within the university, or at sociology depart- ments at other universities.

Finally.

‘Professor Emeritus’ refers to retired faculty with continu- ing ties to the department.

The final list of faculty and their classification according to this scheme was sent to each department for verification and minor adjustments were made according to their responses.
All departments verified the final list used in the following analysis.

Joiirrinls nnd nrticles The articles included in the current study were drawn from two distinct sources.

The SSCI via Web of Science (IS1 2002) is a multidisciplinary online database.

which indexes more than 1,725 journals spanning 50 disciplines, as well as covering individually selected, relevant items from over 3,300 of the world’s scientific and technical journals.
The SA online database (CSA 2000a, b) indexes sociological articles in over 1,500 journals worldwide.

It includes all articles appearing in sociological journals, and selectively indexes articles deemed of socio- logical interest in other journals.

While the SSCI was our sole source of citations, we counted citations to all articles appearing in either than journal articles (e.g.

books, book chapters.


scientific reports, book reriem, notes, letters and editor- ial material) was excluded from the current analysis.

The journals included in the current study were classified into 11 broad categories by their primary emphasis (see Appendix).

index.

hlaterial other \Ve searched the SSCI and the SA by the names of each faculty meinber on the list and verified their accuracy by the departmental affiliation given by each database.
All articles found in either database were included in the list of iiirlc.~rr~ article yirblicntions.

All citations found in the SSCI to articles that were indexed in either the SSCI or the SA were counted as citntioris to iritkscd nrticlcs.

No distinction ivas made between single authors, first authors and other authors.

Iiripnci factors We employed three distinct impact factors for journals, authors and departments.
The joirriinl iriipnct fnctor was obtained from the Joirrrinl Citatioii Rcports (IS1 1998).

For each journal indexed in the SSCI the impact factor is defined as the average number of citations in a given 258 ACTA SDCIOLOGICA 2002 V O LU I E 45 Table 1.

Fnrztlty nt 16 sociology depnrtirierits iri JIP h’ordic coiintries.

1 Inriiinry 2001.
Total faculty Professor ~~ ~~~~~ Other faculty Amlat ed faculty Professor Emeritus Nordic countries Denmark Finland Iceland Nonvay Sweden Nordic sociology departments Abo Academy Copenhagen Business School Goteborg University Lund University Uniei University University of Tromso University of Bergen University of Copenhagen University of Helsinki University of Iceland University of Jyvaskyla University of Oslo University of Stockholm University of Tampcre University of Turku Uppsala University Total year to articles appearing in the two previous years (IS1 2002b).
This measure provides an indication of the average probability of citations to articles appearing in a given journal.

By including this measure in multivariate analysis, we could control for the ‘citation propensity’ of the journal in examining the importance of various other factors on citation patterns.

The indilil~iiditnl iniynct jnctor is delined as the sum of the journal impact factors associated with each article published by a given faculty member.
This measure allowed us to examine the impact of publishing in highly cited journals on patterns of citations to other articles by the same author.

Finally, the idepflrtriientnl iiiipnct jnctor is defined as the sum of the individual impact factors of all faculty members.

This measure allowed us to examine the impact of belonging to a depart- ment characterized by a faculty publishing more in highly cited journals on patterns of citations to the work of individual faculty members.

3.
3.

Descriptive rcsults As can be seen from Table 1, 271 faculty were included in the initial analysis.

A total of 86 of these was categorized as ‘Professor’, 1 5 0 as ‘Other Faculty’.

18 as Xfiliated Faculty’ and 1 7 to this as ‘Professor Emeritus’.

According classification.

Lund University has by far the largest Nordic Sociology department.

with a total of 4 3 faculty members.


Sociology depart- ments with 25-29 faculty include the Copen- hagen Business School, the University of Oslo, Goteborg University and Umei University.

Departments with 13-19 faculty include the University of Copenhagen.

the University of Helsinki, the University of Bergen, the Univer- sity of Stockholm and Uppsala University.

The departments at the remaining six universities have a faculty of ten or fewer.
The study found a total of 1.205 articles published in 1981-2000 in a total of 329 journals (see Appendix).

Table 2 shows the distribution of article publications across types of journals.

Half of these articles appeared in 1 7 journals, while the other half was distributed across 312 journals, each accounting for less than 1 per cent of the total.
About one-quarter of the articles under consideration appeared in six Nordic sociology journals, and half of the in various specialty publications appeared journals.

Productivity and Impact 259 Table 2.

Distribirtiari of 1.205 nrficles (iiidesed iri SSCZ or SA) jmblished iri 1981-ZO00 by facirlty nt 16 sociolpgy drpartrrierits iri firr Nordic rorrritries ncrms jotrriinl types.
A d a Sociologicn National sociology journals Top-tier international sociology Other gcncral sociology Specialty ,journals Denmark Finland Iceland Nonvay Sweden Nordic countries lo'% 7%) 11% 10% 11% 9% 29% 3 7% 0% 2 6% 25% 24% 0% 1% 7% 8% 4% 5% 2 Yu 6% 11% 8 Yu 13% 10% 60% 49% 70% 48% 47% 50% SSCI: Social Scierice Citatio!i Irides: St\: Sociologicnl Abstracts.
About 5 per cent of the articles were published in top-tier international sociology journals; of these 2.4 per cent appeared in five major European general sociology journals (Errropcan Sociological Revieiv, British Jortrnal of Sociology, Sociology, Archiiw Eirropeerines de Sociologie and Zeitschrijt jiir Soziologie), and likewise 2.4 per cent appeared in the three major general sociology journals in the USA journals (Airiericnii Iorrriinl of Sociology, Arrierictlri Socio- logical Review and Social Forces).
About 12 pcr cent of the total publications appeared in four (AlkolioliJolitikka, [British specialty Journal of] Addictioii, Social Scierice arul Medicine, and A'ordisk Alkoliol Tidskrijt).

and 9 per cent of the articles were published in Acta Sociologica.

A total of 10 per cent ofthe articles appeared in 45 general sociology journals.

Table 3.
Table 3.

Totnl atid rricari riirrtiber ofpirblicntioris (iridesed iri SSCl or SA) arid citntioris (iridrsetl iri SSCl) iri 1981-2000 by Jacirlty nt 1 h sociologg depnrtrnerits iri Jive h'ordic rorrritries.
Publications Citations Total Per faculty Total Fcr faculty ~ Country Denmark Finland Iceland Norrvay Sn.eden Departincnt Abo ricadcnly Copenhagen Business School Goteborg University Lund University Umei University University of Tromso University of Bergcn University of Copenhagen Univcrsity of Iklsinki University of Iccland University of Jyvaskyla University of Oslo Univcrsity of Stockholm University of Tampere University of Turku Uppsala University Total .4 3.5 2.4 3.4 1.8 2.6 4.7 8.3 4.2 4.6 8.0 9.5 4.2 1.8 7.6 4.5 SSCI: Socinl Srieriee Citntiori Irides: SA: Sociological Abstracts.
.o 60.3 60.6 2.7 4.8 21.7 18.2 260 AClil SOCIOLOGICA 2002 VOLUllE 45 Table 4.

Descriptive stafisticsjor ttti~lLilcwl arialysis ofcitatioris to yublicntioris (irtdesed iri SSCZ) iti 1981-2000 byjncu!ty at 16 sociology dqiortrrierits iri lire Nordic roiirifries.

Range hlean SE SD 5-42 16.94 2.65 10.59 13.3-60.0 0-35.3 34.6 7.1 1-37 0 4 9 .
8 0-1 0-1 0-1 0.00-8.80 0-20 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 0-1 M O 6.41 3.04 0.43 0.07 0.06 0.62 8.95 0.03 0.1 1 0.05 0.06 0.02 0.03 4.50 3.3 2.9 0.55 0.44 - - - 0.02 0.18 - - - - - - 13.4 12.0 7.58 6.03 - - - 0.73 5.57 - - - - - 0.25 7.54 Department level (level 3) Department size Department al productivity Departmental impact Proportion professors Proportion affiliates Individual level (level 2) Publication record Individual productivity Individual impact Position’ Professor Affiliate Emeritus Article level (level 1) Article characteristics Impact factor of journal Age of article Journal categoryb Education IIealth Economy and stratification Life coursc Applied sociology PoIitical sociology Dependent variable Number of citations 11 at level 3: 16 departments ti a t level 2: 188 faculty ri at level 1: 917 articles Other Faculty are contrast.
General Sociology Journals are contrast.

SSCI: Socinl Scietice Citatioii Irides.

Table 2 also shows the proportion of articles in five journal categories within each country.

It should be noted that these figures reflect the relative importance of each category withiti each of the five Nordic countries under study.
The results indicate that although there are I some national differences in publication practices in indexed journals, there is an overall Nordic pattern of half or more of all publications appearing in specialty journals, follorlrd by one- quarter or more in national journals, about one-tenth in Actn Suciologictl and about one- tenth in other general sociology journals.

The absence of a viable indexed sociology journal in Iceland is the main exception to this pattern.
Specialty journals are somewhat more impor- tant indexed outlets for faculty in Denmark and Iceland, while Finnish faculty publish relatively more frequently sociology journal Susiologitl.

in their national general Table 3 shows the total number of publica- tions and citations.

as well as the mean per faculty in each country and at each department.

On the national level.

these results indicate that patterns of publications and citations in indexed journals are similar in most countries.
However, the analysis of sociology departments suggests that there is considerable variation in the culture of article publication between depart;.

ments in all countries.

This suggests that insofar as a common Nordic culture of article publica- tions exists, it involves certain departments of sociology having more in common with depart- ments in other Nordic countries than with other sociology departments in their own country.
The total number of publications and citations reflects the size of each country and each department, with almost half of all publications and citations attributable to Swed- ish faculty.

The five largest departments (Copen- hagen Business School, University of Oslo, Goteborg University, Lund University and Umed University) similarly account for close to half of all publications and citations.
The niean number of publications and citations per faculty gives an indication of article pro$uctivity and impact, net of depart- ment size.- Departments with an average of seven to ten indexed articles per faculty include the universities of Helsinki, Oslo, Stockholm and Uppsala.

Departments with a n average of four to fire indexed journal publications per faculty include Abo Academy, and the universities of Copenhagen.

Iceland, Jyvliskyla and Tampere.


In ternis of citations, tlie departments in Oslo and Stockholm are in a league of their own, each with a n average of about 60 citations per faculty in the 2 0 year period.

Indexed journal articles by faculty at tlie universities of Helsinki, Iceland and Uppsala were on average cited 2 2 - z 3 times in this period, and articles by faculty at Abo Academy and UmeA University were on average cited 12-1 3 times.
Thus, faculty at tlie sociology departments in Stockholm, Helsinki, Oslo and Uppsala appear to emphasize article publication to a greater degree than faculty at other departments, while the rate of citations to such work is highest in Stockholm and Oslo, folloived by the universities of Helsinki, Iceland and Uppsala.

These findings should not be interpreted as measures of the quality of the faculty or the sociology programs at different Nordic universi- ties.
Alternative f o r m of academic productivity, such as books.

book chapters or scientific reports, were not considered.

Furthermore.

the analysis did not take into account other roles of university faculty, such as teaching.

engagement in public discourse.

or service within and beyond the university community.

The findings do, however.


demonstrate that the different Nordic sociology departments differ substantially in the average number of indexed articles produced by each faculty and the citations that these articles receive in the larger academic community.

In the following analysis we examine these differences more closely, focusing on objective eharacteris- tics of each article, the author.

and the depart- ment to which the author belongs.


Arroz~nfirrg for clij&vwzrcs in citnfioris Article citations are influenced by a variety of Productivity and Impact factors, including the area and impact of the journals, the reputation and productivity of authors, and the structure and culture of academic communities.

In the following analy- sis, we employ multilevel (hierarchical linear) modeling to address these issues (Bryk & Raudenbush 1992).
The descriptive statistics for the data used in this analysis are shown in Table 4.

This analysis is limited to 188 faculty members who had published 9 1 7 articles in journals indexed in the SSCI in the 20 year period under study \Ve corrected for skewness in the dependent variable by truncating the high end of the distribution at 40 or more citation^.^ This affected the ten most cited articles (0.7 per cent of the total number of articles) with 45-107 indexed citations.
The findings described above indicate that the sociological communities in each of the fire countries under study have experienced the global ascendance of specialty journals over general sociology journals.

However.

these findings do not show the extent to which publications in different types of journals yield different citation patterns.
In other words, citations to the work of Nordic sociologists may vary between types of journals because the impact of the journals varies, or because the visibility of Nordic sociologists varies by area.

For each article (level 1).

we included the irnpnct fnctor and the clrtegorg of the journal in ivhich it appeared.

As the number of citations can only increase with time, we also controlled the tiio,iber ofgclrrs from publication.
The total number of articles published by a n author can clearly be expected to increase the total number of citations to his or her work.

However.

scholarly productivity and reputation may also impact the number of citations to each article produced.

Once the characteristics of a given article have been taken into account, the academic position, productivity and visibility (individual impact factor) of its author (level 2) may thus contribute to a greater number of citations.
Earning a professorship in sociology is in part tlie result of high productivity and impact of scholarly work, but such a senior position may in turn contribute to greater visibility.

The formal affiliation of retired faculty or faculty a’f other departments may also reflect the produc- tivity and impact of these individuals, and may siniilariy contribute to their greater visibility in the field.

In this analysis, we included indicators of the academic positions of Projessor.
Afilinte Projessor and Professor Bmeritin.

with Other 2 6 2 ACTA SOCIOLOGICA 2002 I'OLUME 45 Table 5 .

Results oJ rriiiltilerel nrrnlysis of citntioris to piibficatioris (iridesed iri SSCI) in 1981-2000 by Jaciiltg at 016 sociology deparfrrierrts iri jke h'ordic roiirrtries.
Int ercept Department Icvcl (level 3) Department size Departmental productivity Departmental iinpact Proportion professors Proportion affiliates Level 3 explained variance Individual level (level 2 ) Publication record Individual productivity Individual impact Position" Professor Affiliate Emeritus Level 2 explained variance Article level (level 1) Article characteristics Impact factor of journal Age of article Journal categoryb Education Health Economy and stratification Lire course Applied sociology Political sociology Actn Sociologirn Level 1 explained variance Bivariate hlodcl 1 Department Model 2 Individual Model 3 Department.
individual and article Variance 3.44*** 3.20*** 2.91'- 3.53*** 0.OOns 0.02*** 0.03*** 3.6811s 10.5 5*** - - 0.02' - 6.51* 90.7% - - 0.13* - 5.52* 96.1% 0.1 3** 0.29*** 0.84ns 3.75** 0.18ns 3.90*** 0.1 s*** 3.47' 3.0S'** 1.3911s 4.10*** 6.12*** -0.lOns 0.79ns - - 0.2 i*** 0.13" - 2.09*** - 23.3% - - - 64.X" .

4.33*** 0.2s*** - - - 3.08*** 3.85** - - 27.3%) Entered as a block.

Other Faculty are contrast.

Entered as a block.

General Sociology Journals are contrast.

SSCI: Social Scierice Citatiori Irides.


***p < 0.001, **/I < 0.01.

* p < 0.05, ns: not significant.

Fnclrlty serving as the omitted reference cate- gory.

The article productivity of each faculty member was measured as the total number of articles published in indexed journals in the period under consideration.

The iriipnct of each faculty member was operationalized as the sum of the impact factors of the journals in which each of his or her articles appeared.
Finally, the number of citations to any given article may be influenced by the depart- ment of its author (level 3 ) .

Larger departments with more established and more productive scholars may directly and indirectly increase the visibility of all faculty members.

Scholars may be more likely to cite the work of their colleagues when relevant, and belonging to a large or productive department may thus increase the probability of citations.
Furthermore, more established scholars may be instrumental in promoting the work of their colleagues to others, both through their work and through their informal networks.

These factors were measured by dcpartrrlerlt siie.

proportiori profis- sors and proportior] nfilintes, ricpnrtrrieritnl pro- ductivity defined as the total number of articles produced in the department.

and dcpartnieirtnl iriipnct defined as the sum impact factor of these articles.
hliiltilerd tnorlelitzg of ritntiori freqireriry Table 5 shows the multilei~el effects of articles, faculty and departments on the number of Productivity and Impact 263 citations that each article has received.

On the departmental level (levcl3), neither the number of faculty nor the proportion of professors has a n effect on the probability of citations.
How- ever, belonging to a department with a greater proportion of afiliated faculty significantly increases citations to the work of all faculty members.

This pattcrn.holds true when both individual and article characteristics have been taken into account.
In other words, establishing formal ties r~itI1 faculty outside the department does not seem to increase spuriously the visibility of the department by ‘adopting’ the work of productive scholars, but in fact appears to enhance the visibility of the work conducted by other faculty.

This department-level effect does not vary significantly across departments, suggesting that all departments benefit equally from their afliliated faculty.
The total number of publications produced in each department (rlepwtn~ciitnl productivity) significantly predicts citations on the bivariate level.

but this effect disappears once the sum of the impact factors of these articles (departiiierital irttpact) has been In taken into account.

contrast, departmental impact significantly increases the number of citations to all articles, net of the position, productivity and impact of the author.
as ivell as net of the impact factor and category of the journal in which the article appeared.

Belonging to a department where other facuIty members publish more in high- impact journals thus increases the probability of citations to any given article by all faculty members, irrespective of their own position, productivity or visibility, or the journal in which the article was published.

Again.
Again.

this effect does not vary significantly between departments, suggesting that departmental impact operates in similar ways in all the departments under study.

On the individual level (level 2), the number of citations to articles written by Professors or Enmitiis Factdty does not differ from Other F u c I I Z ~ ~ .

As might be expected, Ajiliate Fac~ilty tend to be more widely cited than other faculty members.
However, the sum author irtiynct and publication characteristics fully accounted for this difference.

It is thus important to note that while articles produced in departnients with more affiliates are more widely cited, the affiliates themselves are not more widely cited net of other factors in the model.

Table 5 also shows that on the birariate level.

the prorlirctivity and impact of each faculty contribute to the number of citations to each of their articles.

In the multivariate model, how- ever.


only the individual impact has a n indc- pendent effect on the probability of citation.

This docs, however.

vary significantly between faculty members, indicating that the effect is not simply a function of publishing more in high-impact journals.

This variability could be attributed to a variety of factors outside the scope of the originality.

timeliness or quality of the work, or the formal or informal networks in which the author is embedded.
the current study, including Finally, Table 5 shows the effects of article characteristics (level 1) on the citations that each article receives.

As expected, the age of the article increases the probability of citations, and articles published in high-impact journals are more widely cited.
Before the impact factor of the journals is taken into account, articles published in most specialty journals arc found to have a greater probability of being cited than articles published in general sociology journals.

However, in the cases of both ediicatiort and Iicalth (see Appendix), this can be fully attribu- ted to the higher impact factors of the journals in which the articles arc published.
In the case of articles published within the categories of li/e coiirse and applird sociology, the Nordic contri- butors are significantly more likely to be cited than the impact factor of the journal or other article-level characteristics would suggest.

The number of citations to articles published in Acta Sociologica docs not differ significantly from what the journal’s impact factor would predict.

Overall.

the model accounts rather ~vcll for differences in citation patterns.
The model accounts for 96 per cent of the variation in citations between departments, leaving little room for other omitted departmental charac- teristics.

It accounts for about 65 per cent of the variation in citations between faculty in the five countries, and about 27 per cent of the variation in citations to each article.

.

4.
.

4.

Discussion The publication of indexed journal articles by faculty at Nordic sociology departments was found to be equally divided between gene& sociology journals and specialty journals.

About one-quarter of all the articles indexed were published in general sociology journals in one of the Nordic countries, one-tenth appeared in Acta Sociologica and 15 per cent in dozens of other general sociology journals.
The remaining 264 x r r \ SOCIOLOGICA zoo2 VOLUME 45 50 per cent of the indexed articles were published in hundreds of specialty journals.
These results indicate that the national-Ian- guage sociology journals constitute the single most important journal outlets for most Nordic sociological communities, while the Nordic journal Actn Sociologicn continues to be the single most important English-language Nordic channel into the international sociological conimunity Perhaps the most striking aspect of these findings, however, is the fact that while half of the 1,205 articles were published in 1 7 journals, the remaining half was distributed across 312 journals, each constituting less than 1 per cent of the total (see Appendix).
This diversity may indeed be a defining characteristic of Nordic sociology, and serws as a sobering reminder of the fallacy of imposing a monolithic definition upon the Nordic sociological commu- nity.

Our multilevel analysis of citations to indexed journal articles produced,by the faculty of 1 6 departments of sociology revealed several important patterns.
The SSCI impact factor, calculated on the basis of all citations to articles published in a particular journal in the past two years, strongly predicted the probability of citations to the Nordic sociology articles under study.

These findings support the use of the journal impact factor as a predictor of the number of citations to the work of Nordic sociology faculty.

Furthermore.
Furthermore.

the impact of Actn Sociologicn did not differ significantly from other general sociology journals, supporting Allardt’s (1 995) observation that Xcta Socio- logica has 21 good position in n respectable middle category of journals’.
The impact factor did, however, appear to underestiniate the number of citations in the areas of liJc coiirse studies and opplicd socioJogy, perhaps indicating il relatiwly strong Nordic impact in areiis that have important implications for public policy, as suggested by Bertilsson and Therborn (2000).

Importantly, \ve found that the sum of journal impact factors can be used as a measure of the impact of both individual scholars and entire sociology departments.
Articles by authors who publish more in high-impact journals receive more citations, regardless of the impact of the journaI in wfiicii they appear.

In effect.

authors who publish more in high- impact journals receive more citations to all of their work, not just to those articles that appear in these journals.
It thus appears that scholars may earn a certain level of centrality in their field by publishing in top-tier journals, which enhances the visibility of their work published in lower ranked journals.

It should.

howrer, be noted that the effect of individual impact on citations differs significantly between authors.

In other words, the effects of publishing in high- impact indexed journals are stronger for sonic scholars than for others.
The origin of this variation is beyond the scope of this paper, but may include such academic considerations :is the perceived originality or competence of the author, or such social considerations as the formal or informal networks in which the author is embedded.

Hoivever, it is clear that these differences are not due to the effects of the formal academic position of individual authors.
Citations to articles by Professors and Professors Emeritus do not differ significantly from cita- tions to articles by Other Faculty.

\Vork pub- lished by Afliliated Faculty does receive more citations than the work of regular faculty at each department, but this can fully be attributed in higher to impact journals.
these publications appearing Finally, articles published in departments where the faculty publish more in high-impact journals receive more citations, regardless of both the impact of the journal in which they appear and the publication patterns of their authors.
This may in part be due to patterns of self-citations and citations to the work of colleagues, although the numbers of publica- tions per se hare a much smaller effect on both the individual and the departmental level, and are not significant in the multivariate model.

On the departmental the proportion of level, rlfiliated Faculty does, however, increase the probability of citations to the work of all faculty members.

In other words.
In other words.

net of characteristics of articles or authors, work is more likely to be cited when it is produced in departments with a greater proportion of Afiliated Faculty.

This effect persists when controlling for the total number of publications in the department, but is not found for the proportion of Professors in each department.
It is possible that Affiliated Faculty are more likely to cite the faculty of the department with which they are afliliated than are regular faculty members, although it is not clear why this would be the case.

A more plausible expIanation appears to be that afilia- tions with faculty outside the department help to integrate the department into the wider sociological community, benefiting all faculty members.
These findings suggest that the publication that transcends patterns of individuals and entire department constitute a form of social capital that raises the profile of all faculty members.
The career trajectories of individual faculty may therefore be intimately tied up with the trajectory of the department as a whole, suggesting a form of group mobility individual mobility.4 In this formulation, the collective efforts of faculty may lead certain departments to become known as ‘powerhouses’ in the discipline.

thereby incrcasing the prestige and visibility of all faculty members beyond what their individual efforts could have achieved.
Alternatively, more productive faculty are likely to have lilrger personal networks in the global discipline, and numerous productive faculty may therefore create i1 synergy of overlapping and interlocking global networks, resulting in higher citation counts for both network mem- bers and their colleagues.

Further analysis of the sources of citations would help to clarify this issue.
This research shows that although there are some differences in article productivity and citations in indexed journals among the Nordic countries, these differences can mostly be traced to differences among departments and individ- uals.

In all the departments under study, many of the publications and citations in indexed journals can be attributed to a specific group of scholars, while some faculty in all departments had no such publications or citations.
This does not imply that these latter faculties are necess- arily idle or unproductive.

Most importantly.

the entire field of book publishing falls beyond the scope of the current study, excluding seminal work that has had a profound impact on Nordic and international sociology.

Furthermore, the role of university faculty is continuously evolving and expanding (Gibbons et al.

1994; Barnes et al.

1996; Ziman 2000).


Apart from the vital role of training future generations, faculty include accumulating and allocating research funds, chairing scientific committees, organizing con- ferences, managing research groups and insti- tutions, providing consultation to businesses and government agencies, and participating in public discourse.
Future studies should expand the focus to the entire sociological vocation and the dynamics of division of labor within Nordic sociology departments.

increasingly obligations In this study we hare attempted to move beyond ideological, political and philosophical the ‘true nature’ of Nordic debates over sociology to start outlining the position of Productivity and Impact 265 Nordic sociology in the increasingly global sociological community.
Insofar as the interna- tional sociology journals are concerned, Nordic sociologists are increasingly prolific, and their work is well represented in citations in these journals.

Acta Sociologica appears to have served the Nordic sociological community well in promoting the work of Nordic sociologists and establishing a Nordic profile in the international community.
Thcre are considerable differences between sociology departments within each of the Nordic countries, but these within-country differences are reproduced with remarkable consistency across the Nordic countries.

Sinii- larly, although the total volume of indexed articles published differs among these five the national communities as a countries, whole publish similar proportions of their work in different types of national and interna- tional outlets.
Finally, the multilevel analysis showed that the predictors of citation patterns do not differ significantly between the 16 department under consideration.

Although these results cannot directly address the relative ‘success’ or ‘failure’ of the project of Nordic sociology, they do strongly suggest that the sociological communities in these countries share a common, diversified journal article tradition.
First version received January 2002 Final version accepted hlay 2002 Ackllo~\~lcdgelllellts The authors would like to thank a large number ofdepartmental administrators and faculty chairs at the 16 departments for their assistance in compiling the dataset used in this paper.

and Daniel Beaulieu and Benjamin Pearson-Nelson for research assistance.

The manuscript has benefited greatly from perceptive com- ments from the reviewers and editors of Actn Soriologirn.
Notcs ’ The choice ofsociologydepartments to study is obviously a contentious issue.

Our definition excludes several of the smaller Nordic sociology departments.

as rvell as sociology faculty in Grecnland and the Faroe Islands, and multidisciplin- ary programs in other Rordic countries.

Similarly.

imposing a single scheme of faculty classification on different national realities can never be beyond reproach.
but our final list of faculty and their classification was verified by each of the 16 departments.

* It should be rciteratcd that these figures exclude outlets other than indexed journals.

and thus do not reflect the total productivity or impact of the faculty at each department.

266 ACTA SDCIOLOGICA 2002 \’OLUSIE 4 5 Furthermore.

each of the departments under study includes highly productire and widely cited faculty members.

IIoivever.
IIoivever.

a large number of faculty that do not publish in indexed journals contributes to a loir average.

trhile exceptionally productive faculty members publishing in such outlets raise the average ntrniber substantially.

’ In an alternative analysis.

we used log-transformations of skewed variables.

This did not substantially change either the overall patterns ofthe findings or the fit of the models estimated.
In the folloiving analysis we thus only report the more directly interpretable results based on untransformed data.

This important point was raised by an anonymous ‘ reviewer of an earlier version of the paper.

Iicfcrciiccs Agersnap.

T. 6; \Viderberg.

K. 1995.

The Birth of Acta.

Artn Sociologicn.

38.

353-354.

Allardt.

E. 1989.

Recent Developments in Scandinavian Sociology.

Aiiriirnl Review o/Soriologg.

15.

3 1-45.

Cambridge Scientific Abstracts: Unpublished Corporate Docu- ment.

Durkhcim.
Durkhcim.

E. 1898.

Letter to the Editor.

Arrwrirnrt ~oirrrml o/ Sociolog!].

3.

848-849.

F M .

2001.

Airiis o/thc ESA.

European Sociological Association: http://w~vir..valt.helsinki.fi/esa/main.htm Gibbons.

hl.

1994.

The New Production of Knowledge: TJie Dgrinrrtirs o/ Srierice nrid Rrsrnrrli iri Coriterripornry Societies.

London: Sage.

Harpens.

L. L. 2000.

Using the Literature: Reference Nctworks.

Reference Contexts.

and the Social Structure of Scholarship.


Arriericnri Soriologirnl Review 65.

846-865.

ISI.

1998.

Joiirrinl Citnliort Reports.

Philadelphia.

PA Institute for Scientific Information.

ISI.

2002a.

Sorid Scim-e Citnfiori Irrrkx.

Institute for Scientific Information: http://e.~v~v.ivcbofscicncc.com.

1SI.2002b.

Tlir Irrrprlct fiirtor.

Institute for Scientific Informalion: Iittp://iv\vn:isiiiet.com/isi/hot/essays/ journalcitationreports/i.html.

Lerine.

D. N. 1995.


I’isioris o/tlie Sociohgirnl Trculitiori.

Chicago: hllardt.

E. 1995.

The rormative Years of Scandinavian University of Chicago Press.

Sociology.

Artn Soriologirn.

33.

183-193.

Andersen.

11.

2000.

Influence and Reputation in the Social Sciences: IIorv hluch do Rescarchcrs Agree?

Joirrrinl 01 Donrrrirritntiori.

56.

674-692.

Baldi.

S. 1998.

Normative Versus Social Constructivist Processes in the r\llocation of Citations: A Network-analytic hlodel.
Arricrirnri Soriologirnl Rer.iei\: 63.

829-8.16.

Barnes.

8.. Bloor.

D. Pr Henry, J.

1996.

Srierif$c Krfon.frdgc A Soriologird Arinlgsis.

London: Athlone.

Bertilsson.

hl.

6; Tlierborn.

G. 2000.

Frorrr A DoII’s Hoirse to the IWjnre Stole; Reflecfioris 011 Xorortlic Soriolog!!

Madrid: Interna- tional Sociological Association.

Bourdieu.

I?

6; Passeron.

J.-C. 1967.

Sociology and Philosophy in France Since 1945: Death and Resurrection of a Philosophy \Vithout Subject.

Sorinl RcsmrrJi.
Sorinl RcsmrrJi.

34, 162-212.

Rrante.

T. & Sunesson.

S. 1990.

Kvalitetsmatning med Citationsindex: En Fallgrop for Sociologin.

Soriologisk For- skriirrg.

27.

47-57.

Braun.

T. 1999.

Ribliometric Indicators for the Evaluation of Universities - Intelligence from the Quantification of the Scientific Literature.

Srierttorrrctrirs.

4 3.

4 2 5 4 3 2 .

Bryk.

A. S. 6: Raudenbush.

S. \V.

1992. flicmrchirnl Lirienr XJorkls: Applirntioris nrrd Diitn Amtlgsis AJeflrods.

Xerrbury Park Sage.

Clcmens.


E., Poolvell.

\\!

\t!, hIcIlwaine.

K. 6: Okamoto.

D. 1995.

Careers in Print: Books.

Journals.

and Scholarly Reputations.

Aiiterirnnri ]otrrrml ojSoriologg 191.

4 3 3 4 9 4 .

Cronin.

B.. Snyder.

11.6; Atkins.

11.

1997.

Comparative Citation Rankings of Authors in hlonographic and Journal Literature: A Study of Sociology.

Joirrrrnl o/Dorirrrrrrrtnfiori.

53.

263-273.

CSA.

2000a.

Sociologirnl rlbstrnrts.


Cambridge Scientific Abstracts: http://iviv\r..csa.com hlcGarthy, C. 2000.

The Citation Impact Factor in Social Psychology: A Bad Statistic that Encourages Bad Science?

Currerit Kcsmrclc iri Sorinl I’sgrltologg 5.

1-1 6 .

Xlazur, D. P. 1963.

National Boundaries and the Development of Sociolog~: SocioJogicnl lrrqiriry.

33, 105. hlerton.

R. K. 1949.

Social Tlrcory nrirf Sorinl Sfrric-tiirc.

Glencoe.

IL: Free Press.

Olsen.

T.4.

1998.


A’orsk Ibrskriifig I Irrtrrimsjormk Tidsskr$er; Snrrirrrerilngriirig rrred nridre Imrd bclyst red Bibliorr~etriske i\Jnkrodntn.

Oslo: Norsk Institutt for Studier av Forskning og Utdanning.

Parsons.

T. 1937.

The Strurtirre o/Sorinl Arfiori: A S t d g iri Socinl Tlrcory with Sjicfinl Referrrrre t o n Group o/ Recerrt Erirojienrf I\’rilers.

Glcncoc.

I L Free Press.

Persson.

0.

1985.

Scandinavian Social Science In International Journals.
Social Scierire Irr/orrrintiorf Stirrlics.

5 .

185-190.

Rrsson.

0.. hlelin.

G.. Danell.

R. 6; Kaloudis.

A.

1997.

Research Collaboration at Nordic Universities.

Sricrrtorrwfrirs.

39.

209- 223.

Sigfusdottir.

1.

D. & Thorlindsson.

T. 2000.

Grkrrrisiridi n Islmdi.

Reyhjavik hlenntamalaradune~tid.

Szczepanski.

1.

1969. hlarxist Sociology in the \\’odd-wide Sociological hlovenient.

\’@prosy Filosojii.

6, 14-21.

Thorlindsson.

T. 1982.


Icelandic Sociology: National Conditions and the Emergence of a New Discipline.

Acfn Saciologira.

25.

79-89.

Tosti.

G. 1898.

Suicide in the Light of Recent Studies.

Arrrerirnri Jotrninl o/Soriolog$ 3.

4 6 4 4 7 8 .

\\’allerstein.

I.

1998.

Is Sociology a [\’odd Discipline?

Coif- Ierripornry Soriolog$ 27.

325-326.

Ziman.

J.

2000.

R e d Sriefirr: Il’hnt It Is, nrd tl’hnt It Afenrx.

CSA.

2000b.
CSA.

2000b.

Soriologirnl Abstrnrts: Sclccliorc nrrd Covernge Polirg Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Appctidix Table A l .

ClassiJicatiori o/joirrrinls (iridexed iri SSCl or SA) I 2000 iri each category by /ncirlty at 16 sociology depnrtrrierits iri five Nordic roirrifrics.
Productivity and Impact 267 J ~ prirfinry eriqhsis arid iiirfiiber o/nrtirles published iri 1981- Journals Articles Journals Articles Gerieral sociology hlajor international journals Nordic national journals Other general sociology Gerieral stirdies Philosophy General interest Methodology Statistics and methods Demography Erorioriiic st irtlies Economics \Vork and occupation Organization and stratification Urban and rural studies 59 8 6 45 23 6 17 9 4 5 29 9 6 10 4 Polificnl arid historical General political science Third world issues IIistorical studies Politics and policy \Velfarc and social work Social movements 44 11 7 - 4 14 3 10 Cirlture arid theory Cultural studies hledia and communication Theory Knoivledge and religion 35 11 7 1 3 4 5 70 163 298 109 Edlrcaf ior i General and special education Science studies Sport studies 19 10 9 2 47 15 5 8 13 4 2 I S 4 10 4 29 9 1 4 5 10 Health stiltlies Community and public health Epidemiology Social studies in medicine Psychology and psychiatry Disabilities studies Sport studics Deriarice Crime and delinquency Alcohol and drugs Legal studies LiJe roiirse stirdies hlarriage and fanlily Childhood Adolescence Gender and sexuality Aging and gerontology 31 10 21 1s 10 8 61 11 13 30 7 74 15 7 I 4 25 12 16 64 14 9 35 6 Applied sociology Disasters and accidents Planning and regional Administrative studies Technology and resources Consumer and advertising 23 2 4 ’ 6 6 5 40 16 24 3 I28 45 1 0 40 25 5 3 101 5 91 5 74 34 4 9 1 0 17 44 3 13 7 12 9 Note: This is ;I classification of journals by primary emphasis.
not of article topics.

SSCI: Social Scierice Cifntioii Irides: SA: Sociologicd Abstrncts.