Bo G. Ekelund Mikael Börjesson Sociology of Education and Culture Uppsala University A GDA of Literary Dissertation Bibliographies
Transnational Strategies in Higher Education Funded by the Swedish Research Council Corpus: 680 Ph.D. dissertation bibliographies (from 819) Time period: 1980-2005 319 from Departments of Literature 269 from Departments of Modern Languages (English, Germanic, Romance) 92 from other Departments 194,558 bibliographical references
Primary sources Secondary sources
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 1,00 1. Share of secondary sources 0,90 0,80 0,70 0,60 0,50 0,40 0,30 0,20 0,10 0,00
FCFC 5% (2283) FCDC 4% (1883) Figure 2. By number of cited critics (left) N=50,469 Figure 3. By number of citations (below) N=146,262 FCFC 22% (32,619) NFCC 92% (46303) Cited critics, three categories: Frequently cited foreign critics (FCFC) Frequently cited domestic critics (FCDC) Not frequently cited critics (NFCC) NFCC 53% (77,111) FCDC 25% (36,532)
To explore the pattern of choices among the references to the Frequently cited foreign critics Multiple Correspondence Analysis 13 active variables 44 modalities 676 active cases
13 Active variables Total number of references in the bibliography (RefTot) Share of secondary sources given to Frequently cited critics (FCC) Citations to theorists and critics: Structural, etc Marxist, etc Feminist theory Narrative theory Hermeneutics, etc Psychoanalytical theory, etc Historical-sociological Textual theories Other types of theory Postcolonial theory, etc Archetypal, myth and symbol
13 Active questions, 676 Active cases: Eigenvalues 0,3 0,25 0,2 0,15 0,1 0,05 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Very strong first axis of haves and have-nots.
13 Active variables, 392 Active cases: Eigenvalues After removal of the bibliographies with citations in only five of 13 theory categories 0,2500 0,2000 0,1500 0,1000 0,0500 0,0000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Strong first two axes, no clear cut-off point after second axis
First axis: Left-hand pole Resistance to theory Structural 0; Marxist 0; Other 0; Hermeneutic 0
First axis: Left-hand pole Low on citational resources, generally Reftot <131
First axis: Left-hand pole Low conformity to the field s recognition of authorities FCC: 0-25% FCC: 26-39%
First Axis: Right-hand pole Embrace of theory Hermeneutic >3; Structural >12; Psychoanalysis >2; Other >2; Marxist >2
First Axis: Right-hand pole Rich in citational resources, generally RefTot: >430
First axis Poor vs Rich in recognized critical and theoretical secondary sources
Axis 1. Contributing variables and modalities Theory_struct2 20,4 Structural 1-2 4,3 Structural 12+ 11,6 Structural 0 4,1 Theory_other2 13,6 34,0 Other 0 4,1 Other >2 9,1 Theory_herm2 13,5 47,5 Hermeneutic 0 4,7 Hermeneutic >3 8,4 Theory_Marx2 11,9 59,4 Marxist 0 4,3 Marxist >2 7,3 Theory_histsoc2 8,1 67,5 Hist-soc 0 3,0 Hist-soc >2 4,9 Tot_source2 7,9 75,4 RefTot: <131 3,2 RefTot: >430 2,2 Theory_psych2 7,4 82,8 Psychoanalysis 0 1,4 Psychoanalysis >2 5,5 Theory_narr2 6,2 89,0 Share_SEC_FCC 6,0 95,1 FCC: 0-25% 2,9 Theory_text2 2,6 97,6 Theory_poco3 1,4 99,0 Theory_archmyth2 0,9 99,9 Theory_fem2 0,1 100,0
Second axis: Upper-hand pole High conformity to recognized authorities Traditional and formalist types of theory FCC: 70-89% Textual >1; ArchMyth >2; Narrative >10
Second axis: Lowerhand pole Historicizing and sociological forms of critique Marxist >2; Hist-soc >2; Feminist >2; PoCo 1+
Second axis Traditional Formal vs Radical-critical Historical
Axis 2. Contributing variables and modalities Theory_poco3 17,0 PoCo: 1+ 11,8 PoCo: 0 5,2 Theory_histsoc2 14,8 31,8 Hist-soc >2 5,6 Hist-soc 0 9,0 Share_SEC_FCC 13,9 45,7 FCC: 26-39% 2,8 FCC: 70-89% 9,7 Theory_fem2 13,8 59,5 Feminist >2 8,9 Feminist 0 4,9 Theory_text2 12,6 72,1 Textual 0 4,9 Textual >1 7,7 Theory_archmyth2 9,1 81,2 ArchMyth 0 3,8 ArchMyth >2 4,3 Theory_Marx2 7,3 88,5 Marxist >2 4,9 Marxist 0 1,9 Theory_herm2 3,1 91,6 Theory_narr2 2,9 94,5 Theory_struct2 2,6 97,1 Theory_psych2 2,1 99,2 Tot_source2 0,5 99,7 Theory_other2 0,4 100,1
Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Temporal logic: age Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Temporal logic: literary period Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Temporal logic: age of critics Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Institutional logic: Universities Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Institutional logic: Departments Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Gender logic: individual gender Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Gender logic: choice of author(s) Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Individual theorists Traditional, formalist text-based choices Poor in theory Rich in theory Radical, historical, social contextual choices
Merci
Questions?
Members of academies: Royal Academy of Science; Royal Academy of Letters; the Swedish Academy
French theorists, place of publication 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Scandinavia UK and US France All others
Swedish literary works Share of original titles published: 41% - 52% Corresponding proportion of reviews: 70% Table 1. Objects of study in literary dissertations National origin: Sweden 45% Europe 37% North America 8% Others 10%
5a. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 FCFC, all (2283) Theorists only (627) TO, 20 diss or more (127) Top 30
50 5b. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US FCFC, all (2238) UK Theorists only (627) Germany TO, 20 diss or more (127) France Top 30
50 5c. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US FCFC, all (2238) UK Theorists only (627) Germany TO, 20 diss or more (127) France Top 30
5d. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US FCFC, all (2238) UK Theorists only (627) Germany TO, 20 diss or more (127) France Top 30
50 5e. Frequently cited foreign critics, residence, percentages 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US FCFC, all (2238) UK Theorists only (627) Germany TO, 20 diss or more (127) France Top 30
Roland Barthes, 367 citations in 170 dissertations. 42% published in France, 58% elsewhere.
6. Citations to Bakhtin Circle, site of publication Scandinavia Other US 127 95 39 66 40 21 41 22 13 12 19 9 67 7 12 32 42 2 0 10 1980-85 1986-90 1991-95 1996-2000 2001-05
Distribution of citations to leading theorists Slight overrepresentation in the core discipline (Departments of Litteraturvetenskap) Strong overrepresentation at Stockholm U Exception: Bourdieu at Uppsala, postcolonial theory at Uppsala. An effet de lieu. Does this say anything about the autonomy of these practices?
8. Share of female critics cited among FCFC 0,25 0,70 0,60 0,20 0,50 0,15 0,40 0,10 0,30 0,05 0,20 0,00 Share of femaleauthored dissertations, two-year intervals
2. Feminist theorists, mean number of citations Discipline Mean N, diss. Litteraturvetenskap 5,3 112 Engelska 8 87 Franska 3,8 18 Tyska 2,7 16 Övrigt 5,9 35 Total 6 268
3. Percentage of female-authored dissertations citing foreign feminist theorists Discipline % Litteraturvetenskap 45% 69 of 152 Engelska 68% 63 of 92 Franska 28% 11 of 40 Tyska 38% 13 of 34 Övrigt 35% 22 of 63 Total 47% 178 of 381
Distribution of citations to foreign feminist theory Strong overrepresentation at Departments of English A strong domestic network of citable authorities? Emergent but dominated practice
4. FCFC share of secondary sources 0,45 0,40 0,35 0,30 0,25 0,20 0,15 0,10 0,05 0,00 Littvet Modlang
8. FCFC, country of publication of cited works 0% 5% 1% 1% 17% 28% US UK Germany France 13% Scandinavia 14% 21% Eastern Europe Western Europe, other CAN All others
Wellek, René Hermand, Jost Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty Calinescu, Matei Said, Edward W Jakobson, Roman Cohn, Dorrit Steiner, George Hassan, Ihab Man, Paul de Auerbach, Erich Bettelheim, Bruno Moi, Toril Eliade, Mircea Felski, Rita Lauretis, Teresa de Fromm, Erich Bhabha, Homi K
9. FCFC, country of publication of cited works, littvet only 1% 0% 0% 3% 24% US UK 29% Germany France Scandinavia Eastern Europe 17% Western Europe CAN All other 12% 14%
Table 1. Secondary sources, 3 categories Number of critics Number Percent of citations Percent Frequently cited foreign critics 2283 5% 32619 22% Frequently cited domestic critics 1883 4% 36532 25% Infrequently cited critics, all 46303 92% 77111 53% Total 50469 100% 146262 100%
Frequently cited foreign critics, residence (percentages) 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 US France UK Germany All FCFC 2283 Western Europe Theorists only 628 Eastern Europe CAN TO, 20 diss or more TO, top 30 127 30 Scandinavia All other Multiple
FCFC, national origin by citations 7000 6000 5000 4000 1980-1992 1993-2005 3000 2000 1000 0 US UK Germany France All other
FCFC, national residence by citations 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 1980-1992 1993-2005 3000 2000 1000 0 US UK Germany France All other