IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/pubcho/v202y2025i1d10.1007_s11127-024-01181-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Democratization and knowledge in social sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Amir Tayebi

    (University of Wisconsin-La Crosse)

  • Sheida Teimouri

    (University of Wisconsin-La Crosse)

Abstract

Scholars in the social sciences and humanities play a crucial role in shaping political discourse by conducting research, teaching, and engaging the public. Therefore, autocratic regimes frequently impose restrictions and surveillance on social scientists’ and humanists’ scholarly and teaching activities to ensure alignment with the regime’s political interests. Our study explores how reducing such restrictions, as expected by a transition to democracy (democratization), influences academic knowledge creation and dissemination in these fields. We also investigate if the impact of democratization differs for the STEM fields that tend to benefit from preexisting academic freedom. Using data from SCImago (Scimago journal & country rank, 2021. https://www.scimagojr.com ), we use the total number of published documents as knowledge formation and average citations per document as knowledge dissemination metrics across 149 countries from 1996 to 2018. Drawing on the Episodes of the Regime Transformation (ERT) dataset, we find that democratization significantly increases citations per document in the social sciences and humanities, though the results are less robust for the humanities. There is no statistically significant change in the volume of published documents post-democratization in either field, possibly due to the limitations of our metric in capturing non-traditional contributions. This limitation is particularly pronounced in the humanities, where books, rather than articles, serve as the primary scholarly output. Therefore, they fall outside the scope of our knowledge creation metrics, leading to an underestimation of democratization’s impact. We do not find any effect of democratization on our knowledge creation or dissemination metrics in the STEM fields. Our results withstand various checks, including an instrumental variable approach to address potential endogeneity in democratization periods.

Suggested Citation

  • Amir Tayebi & Sheida Teimouri, 2025. "Democratization and knowledge in social sciences," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 202(1), pages 77-108, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:202:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s11127-024-01181-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11127-024-01181-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11127-024-01181-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11127-024-01181-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Democracy; Academic freedom; Citations; Social sciences;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • O35 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Social Innovation

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:pubcho:v:202:y:2025:i:1:d:10.1007_s11127-024-01181-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.