Comparing disciplinary engagement in global health research across the social sciences
Joseph Harris, Jonathan D. Shaffer
Abstract
Joseph Harris, Jonathan D. Shaffer
Abstract
Objectives What did social science disciplines contribute to the study of global health before the coronavirus pandemic? This article compares the contributions of four major social science disciplines—anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology—to the study of global health. Methods We assessed disciplinary contributions through analysis of Web of Science; disciplinary annual reviews; and each discipline's top two general focus journals, complemented by literature reviews. Results Of the four disciplines, anthropology and economics have contributed relatively more in quantitative terms, although qualitative contributions have been refracted through the larger histories, methods, and theoretical concerns. Although interest in global health research has grown across the disciplines, only in anthropology has it achieved a measure of prominence in top journals. Conclusion Cross-disciplinary comparison draws out how each discipline approaches global health; which topics it studies; and the topic's centrality/marginality within the broader disciplines.
OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objectives What did social science disciplines contribute to the study of global health before the coronavirus pandemic? This article compares the contributions of four major social science disciplines—anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology—to the study of global health. Methods We assessed disciplinary contributions through analysis of Web of Science; disciplinary annual reviews; and each discipline's top two general focus journals, complemented by literature reviews. Results Of the four disciplines, anthropology and economics have contributed relatively more in quantitative terms, although qualitative contributions have been refracted through the larger histories, methods, and theoretical concerns. Although interest in global health research has grown across the disciplines, only in anthropology has it achieved a measure of prominence in top journals. Conclusion Cross-disciplinary comparison draws out how each discipline approaches global health; which topics it studies; and the topic's centrality/marginality within the broader disciplines.
Key concepts: Discipline, Sociology, Social science, Centrality, Science studies, Global health, Social studies, Pandemic