Developing the Ideas of the Scientific School of L. S. Vygotsky: Scientific Publications of the Journal “Cultural and Historical Psychology” (2005-2016)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
he article presents the analysis of the development of the ideas of L.S. Vygotsky’s school using the example of the publications in the international scientific journal “Cultural and Historical Psychology” (for the period 2005 through 2016). Over the period from 2005 to the end of 2016, 595 articles of 524 authors from 32 countries have been published in the journal “Cultural and Historical Psychology.” The study of the subjects of the articles published in the journal was held within the framework of the following criteria: scientometric publication indicators; group of authors; themes of the publications; relevance of the articles for their readers. The research uses the following sources: Russian Science Citation Index (RSCI); repository data of the psychological editions of https://psyjournals.ru/; report data on the activities of the journal “Cultural and Historical Psychology.” The citation frequency of the journal’s publications peaks in 2007, 2009 and 2006. Empirical findings comprise major part of the publications. The most developed areas are the studies of speech and thinking, personality, and communication.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".