Discourse Epistemetrics: A Novel Measure of Stance and Disciplinarity
Saved in:
| Title: | Discourse Epistemetrics: A Novel Measure of Stance and Disciplinarity |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Bradford Demarest |
| Source: | ProQuest LLC. 2021Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University. |
| Availability: | ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 145 |
| Publication Date: | 2021 |
| Document Type: | Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations |
| Descriptors: | Communication (Thought Transfer), Scholarship, Interdisciplinary Approach, Faculty, Intellectual Disciplines, Research and Development, Theory Practice Relationship, Discourse Analysis, Philosophy, Psychology, Physics |
| ISBN: | 979-85-16-94914-2 |
| Abstract: | There has been a convergence of economic, epistemological, social, and communicative trends over recent decades that shape the ways scholars communicate within their fields, across fields with other academics, and with non-academic entities in industry, government, and the lay public. Consequently, scholars must not only convince those controlling funding that their research is relevant within their field, but also that it is more relevant than research conducted in other fields, and they must spell out its relevance to the wider world. Meanwhile, more interdisciplinary research is encouraged. In order for this research to yield successful results however, researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds need to recognize, and reconcile, differences in social and epistemological assumptions. Although linguistics research has developed and tested frameworks to identify and describe such characteristics in the written discourse of scientific and scholarly communities, scientometrics has heretofore modeled disciplinary and interdisciplinary social and communicative structures through patterns of citation and reference, authorial collaborations, and conceptual proximity, but left aside measuring and describing disciplinary cultures based on written social and epistemic discourse. This dissertation proposes and investigates a new method for evaluating the degree and kind of social and epistemic differences between academic disciplines based on these previous studies of discourse, via three studies. In the discourse epistemetrics method (Demarest & Sugimoto, 2015), texts of a given genre are collected and grouped by the knowledge-oriented community that created the texts, translated into vectors of frequencies of lexical terms commonly used to express social and epistemic stance, and modeled using Support Vector Machines (SVMs), with accuracy rates used as metrics of distance between disciplines and feature weights conveying specific terms indicating one discipline or the other. The first study establishes a proof-of-concept, modeling differences between philosophy, psychology, and physics dissertation abstracts and testing the accuracy and interpretability of five feature sets. The second study expands the set of disciplines to 14 and tests whether a network of disciplines can be derived and interpreted, as well as comparing the resulting network to one derived from discipline-level bibliographic coupling data for the same disciplines. The third and final study compares networks for abstracts and full texts from the same papers from five disciplines. The discourse epistemetrics method is found to distinguish accurately and meaningfully between disciplines, especially as applied to abstracts, and is proposed as a useful tool for search ranking as well as aiding interdisciplinary scholarship. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Access URL: | https://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:28547806 |
| Accession Number: | ED667260 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: ED667260 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Dissertation/ Thesis PubTypeId: dissertation PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Discourse Epistemetrics: A Novel Measure of Stance and Disciplinarity – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bradford+Demarest%22">Bradford Demarest</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22ProQuest+LLC%22"><i>ProQuest LLC</i></searchLink>. 2021Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: N – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 145 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2021 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Communication+%28Thought+Transfer%29%22">Communication (Thought Transfer)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scholarship%22">Scholarship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interdisciplinary+Approach%22">Interdisciplinary Approach</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty%22">Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intellectual+Disciplines%22">Intellectual Disciplines</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+and+Development%22">Research and Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Theory+Practice+Relationship%22">Theory Practice Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Discourse+Analysis%22">Discourse Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Philosophy%22">Philosophy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Psychology%22">Psychology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Physics%22">Physics</searchLink> – Name: ISBN Label: ISBN Group: ISBN Data: 979-85-16-94914-2 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: There has been a convergence of economic, epistemological, social, and communicative trends over recent decades that shape the ways scholars communicate within their fields, across fields with other academics, and with non-academic entities in industry, government, and the lay public. Consequently, scholars must not only convince those controlling funding that their research is relevant within their field, but also that it is more relevant than research conducted in other fields, and they must spell out its relevance to the wider world. Meanwhile, more interdisciplinary research is encouraged. In order for this research to yield successful results however, researchers from different disciplinary backgrounds need to recognize, and reconcile, differences in social and epistemological assumptions. Although linguistics research has developed and tested frameworks to identify and describe such characteristics in the written discourse of scientific and scholarly communities, scientometrics has heretofore modeled disciplinary and interdisciplinary social and communicative structures through patterns of citation and reference, authorial collaborations, and conceptual proximity, but left aside measuring and describing disciplinary cultures based on written social and epistemic discourse. This dissertation proposes and investigates a new method for evaluating the degree and kind of social and epistemic differences between academic disciplines based on these previous studies of discourse, via three studies. In the discourse epistemetrics method (Demarest & Sugimoto, 2015), texts of a given genre are collected and grouped by the knowledge-oriented community that created the texts, translated into vectors of frequencies of lexical terms commonly used to express social and epistemic stance, and modeled using Support Vector Machines (SVMs), with accuracy rates used as metrics of distance between disciplines and feature weights conveying specific terms indicating one discipline or the other. The first study establishes a proof-of-concept, modeling differences between philosophy, psychology, and physics dissertation abstracts and testing the accuracy and interpretability of five feature sets. The second study expands the set of disciplines to 14 and tests whether a network of disciplines can be derived and interpreted, as well as comparing the resulting network to one derived from discipline-level bibliographic coupling data for the same disciplines. The third and final study compares networks for abstracts and full texts from the same papers from five disciplines. The discourse epistemetrics method is found to distinguish accurately and meaningfully between disciplines, especially as applied to abstracts, and is proposed as a useful tool for search ranking as well as aiding interdisciplinary scholarship. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.] – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: URL Label: Access URL Group: URL Data: <link linkTarget="URL" linkTerm="https://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:28547806" linkWindow="_blank">http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation&res_dat=xri:pqm&rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:28547806</link> – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: ED667260 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED667260 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 145 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Communication (Thought Transfer) Type: general – SubjectFull: Scholarship Type: general – SubjectFull: Interdisciplinary Approach Type: general – SubjectFull: Faculty Type: general – SubjectFull: Intellectual Disciplines Type: general – SubjectFull: Research and Development Type: general – SubjectFull: Theory Practice Relationship Type: general – SubjectFull: Discourse Analysis Type: general – SubjectFull: Philosophy Type: general – SubjectFull: Psychology Type: general – SubjectFull: Physics Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Discourse Epistemetrics: A Novel Measure of Stance and Disciplinarity Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Bradford Demarest IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2021 Identifiers: – Type: isbn-print Value: 979-85-16-94914-2 Titles: – TitleFull: ProQuest LLC Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
