Exploring the Landscape of American Sociology: A Bibliometric Analysis of Top Journal Publications (2011–2022)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the 21st century, American sociology has significantly influenced global sociological discourse. This research utilizes bibliometric methods to analyze 1,176 articles from the ASR, ARS, and AJS journals between 2011 and 2022, showcasing the dynamic development within the field. The research highlights the pivotal contributions of Harvard, Stanford, and UC Berkeley, and notes the emerging roles of the University of Toronto and NYU in shaping sociological discourse. We spotlight key scholars such as Soule, Desmond, Killewald, and Goldberg, whose works on social inequality—specifically in income, race, and gender—have significantly influenced contemporary sociology. the intensive focus on social inequality has spotlighted themes of income, race, and gender disparities. This focus complements the broad scholarly attention drawn to social movements, organizational studies, and the dynamics of social networks. Intersecting across these domains is the profound scholarly dedication to social justice. Indeed, the quest for equity and justice forms a critical undercurrent in contemporary sociological research, mirroring the discipline’s enduring engagement with these pivotal societal issues. This study not only charts the intellectual progression of American sociology but also underscores its global relevance and potential future directions. By integrating bibliometric analysis with a critical review of sociological literature, this article offers valuable insights into the evolving dynamics of the discipline.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.063 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".