printExpert Activity of a Scientific Journal:
Criteria and Role in the Reproduction of Science (the case of Socis)
Popova I.P.
Cand. Sci. (Sociol.), Leading Researcher, Institute of Sociology of FCTAS RAS, Moscow, Russia irina_popova@list.ru
Popova I.P. Expert Activity of a Scientific Journal: Criteria and Role in the Reproduction of Science (the case of Socis). Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2025. No 3. P. 27-39
The article raises the issue of criteria for the expert activity by a scientific journal using the example of the journal “Sociological Studies” in the context of its role in modern reproductive processes in science. The criteria are understood from the point of view of developing professional control mechanisms and procedures that ensure the sustainable functioning and development of the scientific community. Three main criteria of expert activity are identified: the normality of the scientific knowledge production, scientific ethics and scientific communication. The introductory journal’s editorial articles from 2010 to 2024 are analyzed. Conclusions are drawn about the priority attention to methodological issues of publications and their relevance. Attention is paid to the journal’s communicative function as one of the main tasks of the publication in consolidating the sociological community. There have been changes in the discussion of the topics of these criteria in different periods. The issues of continuity and collegiality, as well as conceptual consistency in scientific publications, are common to all the identified criteria of expert activity.
Ablazhej A. M. (2021) Ethics of science: classical norms and modern deformations. Idei i idealy` [Ideas and ideals]. Vol. 13. No. 3–1: 103–115. DOI: 10.17212/2075‑0862‑2021‑13.3.1‑103‑115. (In Russ.)
Baty`gin G.S. (2024) The ethos of science. The second lecture in the course “Methodology of sociological research”, 2002–2003 academic year in Shaninka. Puti Rossii. Zhurnal cocial`ny`x i e`tnograficheskix issledovanij [The ways of Russia. Journal of Social and Ethnographic Research]. Vol. 2. No. 2: 36–56. (In Russ.)
Cherny`sh M.F. (2022) Peer review in modern Russian science. Upravlenie naukoj: teoriya i praktika. [Management of science: theory and practice]. Vol. 4. No. 1: 18–39. DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2022.4.1.1. (In Russ.)
Czvy`k V.A., Savvina O. V. (2017) Ethics of science and ethics of scientific publications. Chelovek i kul`tura [Human & Culture]. No. 3: 8–22. (In Russ.)
Demidenko S. Yu. (2024) The role of peer review in improving the quality of scientific knowledge (using the example of the journal “Sociological Studies”). Sociologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. 2024. No. 10: 80–91. (In Russ.)
Freidson E. (1984) The Changing Nature of Professional Control. Annual Review of Sociology. Vol. 10: 1–20.
Gureev V. N., Mazov N. A. (2021) The role and significance of peer review in domestic and foreign scientific periodicals in the information and library field: a comparative analysis. Nauchny`j redaktor i izdatel` [Scientific editor and publisher]. No. 6(2): 93–103. DOI: 10.24069. (In Russ.
Kosyakov D. V. (2024) Scientific ethics and the crisis of scientific research integrity. Universitetskaya kniga [The university book]. No. 3: 45–51. (In Russ.)
Kuckartz U. (2019) Qualitative Text Analysis: A Systematic Approach. Compendium for Early Career Researchers in Mathematics Education / G. Kaiser, N. Presmeg, eds. Chapter 8: 181–197.
Lazar M. G. (2010) Ethics of Science in the USSR – Russia: an essay on the history of formation. Sociologicheskij zhurnal [A sociological journal]. No. 1: 63–77. (In Russ.)
Lazar M. G. (2012) Social control and self‑control in modern science. Ucheny`e zapiski Rossijskogo gosudarstvennogo gidrometeorologicheskogo universiteta [Scientific notes of the Russian State Hydrometeorological University]. No. 23: 220–236. (In Russ.)
Merton R. (2006) Social theory and social structure / Transl. Moscow: ACT: ACT MOSKVA. (In Russ.)
Mieg H. A. (2022) Science as a Profession: And Its Responsibility. In: The Responsibility of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science / H. A. Mieg (ed.) (AUST, vol. 57). Springer: 69–90.
Mieg H. A., Evetts J. (2018) Professionalism, Science, and Expert Roles: A Social Perspective. In: The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance. Cambridge University Press: 127–148.
Mirskaya E. Z. (2005) R. K. Merton and the ethos of classical science. Filosofiya nauki [The philosophy of science]. Vol. 11. No. 1: 11–28. (In Russ.)
Polanyi M. (2000 [1962]). The republic of science: It’s political and economic theory. Minerva. London. Vol. 38. No. 1: 1–21.
Popova I. P. (2017) Professional career in science and technology: on sustainability problem. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 12: 124–134. DOI: 10.7868/S0132162517120133. (In Russ.)
Savinskaya O. B. (2023) High‑quality content analysis: capabilities, methods, procedures. In: Praktiki analiza kachestvenny`x danny`x v social`ny`x naukax [The practice of analyzing qualitative data in the social sciences] / M. Yu. Aleksandrova, N. S. Voronina (Mastikova), A. D. Govorova [et.al.]. Moscow.: Nacional`ny`j issledovatel`skij universitet “Vy`sshaya shkola e`konomiki”: 99–117. DOI: 10.17323/9785‑7598‑2542‑5. (In Russ.)
Semenov E. V. (2023) Development of a network of scientific journals in Russia: strategic, technological and organizational issues. Sociologicheskaya nauka i social`naya praktika [Sociological science and social practice] Vol. 11. No. 3(43): 116–140. DOI: 10.19181/snsp.2023.11.3.6. (In Russ.)
Shkorubskaya E. G. (2019) The genesis of a scientific article as a form of communication between scientists. Sociologiya nauki i texnologij [Sociology of science and technology]. Vol. 10. No. 2: 56–74. DOI: 10.24411/2079‑0910‑2019‑12003.
Stepin V. S. (2006) The philosophy of science. General problems: a textbook for graduate students and applicants for a PhD degree. Moscow: Gardariki. (In Russ.)
Tambovcev V. L. (2007) Expertise as an institution: functions and conditions of effectiveness and efficiency. [Science. Innovation. Education]. Vol. 2. No. 2: 17–29. (In Russ.)
Tambovcev V. L. (2021) Peer review in modern scientific communications. Upravlenie naukoj: teoriya i praktika [Management of science: theory and practice]. Vol. 3. No. 1: 35–54. DOI: 10.19181/smtp.2021.3.1.2. (In Russ.)
Tihonova E. V., Raiczkaya L. K. (2021) Reviewing as a tool for ensuring effective scientific communication: traditions and innovations. Nauchny`j redaktor i izdatel` [Scientific editor and publisher]. No. 6(1): 6–17. DOI: 10.24069/2542‑0267‑2021‑1‑6‑17. (In Russ.)
Toshhenko Zh.T., Demidenko S. Yu. (2019) “The journal lives, like the entire Russian people, in anticipation of serious changes in the life of the country…” (interview Zh. T. Toshchenko). Sociologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. No. 7: 3–11. DOI: 10.31857/S013216250005770‑0. (In Russ.)
Vinogradova T. V. (2018) The ethos of science and the modern system of scientific knowledge production. Naukovedcheskie issledovaniya [Scientific research]: 65–88. DOI: 10.31249/scis/2018.00.05. (In Russ.)
Wakeling S., Speci V., Fry D. [et al.] (2019) Scientific communities: the role of open access journals and mega‑journals in scientific communication. Bibliosfera [Bibliosphere]. No. 1: 3–9. DOI: 10.20913/18153186‑2019‑1‑3‑9 (Part 1); No. 2: 3–14. DOI: 10.20913/1815‑3186‑2019‑2‑3‑14. (In Russ.)
Yurevich A. V., Yurevich M. A. (2021) Garbage in science. Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. [Bulletin of the Russian Academy of Sciences]. Vol. 91. No. 8: 724–733. DOI: 10.31857/S0869587321080107. (In Russ.)