An Interpretation of Digitalization of Science: A Comparative Outline of the Main Analytical Approaches

Dmitry Sokolov
{"title":"An Interpretation of Digitalization of Science: A Comparative Outline of the Main Analytical Approaches","authors":"Dmitry Sokolov","doi":"10.19181/smtp.2024.6.1.8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article attempts to summarize the most significant approaches to understanding the digitalization of science. We proceed from the assumption that the development of theoretical models for assessing the “digital turn” will not only help to clarify the changes taking place in science, but will also allow us to better understand them, as well as possibly regulate various aspects of digitalization. We can say that by the 2010s at least four categories (or clusters) of approaches to the conceptualization of digitalization have developed, and each category often operates with its own definitions and a separate conceptual framework. This refers to scientometric, economic, information technology (IT) and sociological approaches to understanding the process of digitalization in science. Even a cursory comparison of their specific characteristics allows us to say that all the paradigms listed above have a number of common features and are based on several fundamental premises regarding the trends in the development of science and education, although an assessment of these trends, as well as an emphasis within each approach can differ significantly. We can single out three most large-scale complexes of phenomena that are in the focus of researchers in the field of digitalization of science: this is the formation of a global academic community thanks to digital services (1), the personalization of higher education (2) and the problem of digital inequality (3). The juxtaposition of these processes, thus, significantly changes several important features of science in general, forcing the academic community to raise questions about the definitions and essence of scientific knowledge once again.","PeriodicalId":433804,"journal":{"name":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","volume":" 38","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Management: Theory and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19181/smtp.2024.6.1.8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article attempts to summarize the most significant approaches to understanding the digitalization of science. We proceed from the assumption that the development of theoretical models for assessing the “digital turn” will not only help to clarify the changes taking place in science, but will also allow us to better understand them, as well as possibly regulate various aspects of digitalization. We can say that by the 2010s at least four categories (or clusters) of approaches to the conceptualization of digitalization have developed, and each category often operates with its own definitions and a separate conceptual framework. This refers to scientometric, economic, information technology (IT) and sociological approaches to understanding the process of digitalization in science. Even a cursory comparison of their specific characteristics allows us to say that all the paradigms listed above have a number of common features and are based on several fundamental premises regarding the trends in the development of science and education, although an assessment of these trends, as well as an emphasis within each approach can differ significantly. We can single out three most large-scale complexes of phenomena that are in the focus of researchers in the field of digitalization of science: this is the formation of a global academic community thanks to digital services (1), the personalization of higher education (2) and the problem of digital inequality (3). The juxtaposition of these processes, thus, significantly changes several important features of science in general, forcing the academic community to raise questions about the definitions and essence of scientific knowledge once again.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对科学数字化的解读:主要分析方法比较概要
本文试图总结理解科学数字化的最重要方法。我们的出发点是,建立评估 "数字化转向 "的理论模型不仅有助于澄清科学领域正在发生的变化,还能让我们更好地理解这些变化,并有可能对数字化的各个方面进行规范。我们可以说,到 2010 年代,至少已经形成了四类(或四组)数字化概念化方法,每一类通常都有自己的定义和独立的概念框架。这指的是用科学计量学、经济学、信息技术(IT)和社会学的方法来理解科学的数字化进程。即使对它们的具体特点进行粗略的比较,我们也可以说,上述所有范式都有一些共同 的特点,都基于科学和教育发展趋势的几个基本前提,尽管对这些趋势的评估以及每种方 法的侧重点可能有很大的不同。我们可以选出科学数字化领域研究人员关注的三个最大规模的现象综合体:即借助数字服务形成全球学术界(1)、高等教育个性化(2)和数字不平等问题(3)。因此,这些进程的并置极大地改变了科学的几个重要特征,迫使学术界再次对科学知识的定义和本质提出质疑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
On the Separation of Scientific Activity and the State-owned Corporate Form of Science Management in Contemporary Russia. Part 1 Jurisprudence for the Development of Science: Ideas that Should Not Be Forgotten (To the 100th Anniversary of the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the Government of the RF) The State Policy of the USSR in Relation to the Academy of Sciences of the USSR in the Second Half of the 20th Century. The Organizational and Legal Aspect Introduction of Artificial Intelligence Technologies in Russian Economy: A Practitioner’s View Digitalization of Public Administration and Economy: Terminological Clarity as a Factor of Success of Digital Development. Review of the Textbook “Digital State and Economy” Edited by S. E. Prokofiev, O. V. Panina and K. V. Kharchenko
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1