Suchergebnisse

Google Scholar is an appealing data source for the measurement of scientific production in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) fields. Its appeal derives from its extensive coverage of the literature. This contrasts with issues of data quality, which are still quite controversial. This chapter aims to evaluate the reliability and validity of bibliometric indicators taken from Scholar as well as their coverage of the scientific production in the social sciences. The analysis will be based on a comparison of Scholar with other bibliometric data sources (Web of Science and Scopus) plus an institutional dataset. The reliability of Scholar indicators will be investigated through correlational analysis, while their validity will be assessed using different external criteria (the results of national evaluation procedures based on a peer review approach). The analysis will be developed for the population of Italian university professors in a subset of SSH: political philosophy, history, political science and sociology. The final discussion of the results will take into account the various purposes that bibliometric exercises try to achieve.

L'articolo si compone di due parti. La prima, più generale, è dedicata all'introduzione alle classifiche delle università, alla presentazione delle principali classifiche internazionali e alla discussione degli usi che ne vengono fatti. La seconda si concentra sulla classifica italiana Censis-la Repubblica sviluppando due tipi di analisi: dapprima un'analisi, per così dire teorica, sull'impianto della classifica e la validità degli indicatori, poi un'analisi empirica di indicatori e indici sulla base di una parziale ricostruzione della base dati Censis-la Repubblica. A partire dai risultati di tali analisi viene stilato un elenco degli elementi a cui prestare attenzione nella definizione di classifiche di istituzioni complesse come le università. The paper consists of two parts. The first is more general: it introduces to university ranking, shows the leading international ranking, discusses the uses people make of rankings. The second focuses on Italian ranking Censis-la Repubblica developing two different kinds of analyses: after considering indicators validity and reliability, principal components analysis and cluster analysis are applied to a partial replication of Censis-la Repubblica data. A list of points to pay attention comes out of these analyses: it can be useful when defining rankings of complex institutions such as universities.

The social and political implications of the COVID-19 pandemic are receiving increasing attention in the literature. This article aims to contribute to this fast-growing research programme by focusing on the degree to which Italian citizens perceive democratic institutions as effective in coping with crises like the COVID-19 emergency. We put forward a set of hypotheses whereby negative evaluations of the effectiveness of democracy can be associated with social proximity to the disease and with perceived health and economic threats. We also argued that political factors can interact with such threats. Moreover, we hypothesised that certain factors dealing with the concepts of social capital and civic culture can help inhibit negative opinions about the effectiveness of democracy. To test these hypotheses, we analysed public opinion data collected in Italy between April and July 2020 using a Rolling Cross-Section survey design. The data showed that evaluations of democracy became more negative with social proximity to the disease and with individual perceived vulnerability, understood in health and economic terms. Our findings also highlighted that certain social factors which "underpin" democracy moderated negative evaluations. Finally, political factors like ideology and government appraisal shaped the relationship between individual threats and evaluations of democracy.

In this article, we present an application of the rolling cross-section (RCS) design to monitor changes in public opinion during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy (ResPOnsE Covid-19 project, University of Milan Statale). The RCS is a dynamic survey tool used predominantly in the analyses of public opinion during electoral campaigns. Because of its dynamic nature, we argue that it is an ideal instrument to monitor public opinion during a pandemic. Specifically, we present an RCS online survey implemented in Italy from April to July 2020 and we present some illustrative analyses of changes in behaviors, attitudes, and opinions during the Covid-19 crisis to highlight the potential of the design. Ultimately, we assert that RCS surveys could be very powerful instruments to inform policy makers of the dynamics of public opinion during a crisis, especially when inserted within existent high-quality survey infrastructures.

While official science has given its answer to the question on the origin of the Coronavirus (animal to human transmission), alternative theories on human creation of the virus – purposely or inadvertently – have flourished. Those alternative theories can be easily located among the family of conspiracy theories, as they always assume some secretive activity of some groups acting on their self-interest and against the good of the many. The article assesses the prevalence of these beliefs during the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy, studies its development during the pandemic, and investigates its potential determinants. In particular, it analyses the relationship between beliefs in alternative theories on the origin of the virus and political orientation, by arguing that the association cannot be attributed to (politically) motivated reasoning, as the issue has not been highly politicized in the Italian context. Alternatively, the article suggests that the main factor driving beliefs in alternative accounts on the origins of the virus is institutional trust. Political orientation moderates its effects, depending on specific conditions (e.g. cue taking, position of the supported party either in government or opposition), and eventually reinforcing scepticism towards epistemic authorities for those with low trust in institutions. Data come from the ResPOnsE COVID-19 survey, carried out with daily samples from April to July 2020 (N > 15.000) to monitor the development of the Italian public opinion during the Coronavirus pandemic.