Abstract
In this article we report on findings from a large-scale bibliographic study conducted based on the citation practices within the field of research on adult learning. Our data consist of 151,261 citation links between more than 33,000 different authors whose papers were published in five leading international journals in the field of adult learning during the time period 2006–2014. By analysing the composition of the dominating citation clusters we are able to construct a telescopic view of the research field based on an accumulation of bibliographic citations. The results consist of two parts. First we go through the dominating players active in the field, their position and mutual relationship. Secondly, we derive two main structural oppositions inherent in the citation networks, one connected to the research object (studying education or work) and the second to the level of analysis (cognition or policy). We find that the most dominating tradition within adult learning the last few decades – sociocultural perspectives on learning - occupies a very central position in the space of citations, balancing between these opposing poles. We hope that this analysis will help foster reflexivity concerning our own research practices, and will reveal the relations of dominance currently prevailing within the field of adult learning.
Highlights
In recent years, researchers throughout the world have come under increased pressure to publish in English, direct their scholarly work to internationally acclaimed journals indexed in the dominating databases (i.e. Scopus and Web of Science), and render their work citable among peers in other countries
In the middle of the figure we find bibliographies related to the most dominating tradition within adult learning over the last few decades – sociocultural perspectives on learning (e.g. Lave, Wenger, Billett, Engeström, Boud) as well as what seems to have emerged as a popular research tradition more recently, namely that of practice theory (e.g. Hager, Gherardi, Fenwick)
In the following we will conclude by considering our results in relation to previous studies on the field of adult learning, as well as in relation to our bibliometrical method
Summary
Researchers throughout the world have come under increased pressure to publish in English, direct their scholarly work to internationally acclaimed journals indexed in the dominating databases (i.e. Scopus and Web of Science), and render their work citable among peers in other countries. Strong political waves of managerial reforms are gradually making academic career trajectories and promotions more dependent upon what Larsson (2009) calls Ban emerging economy of publication and citations^ This development, as well as the standardized measurements of scientific output and evaluation on which it is reliant (number of articles, journal impact, average citations, etc.), is often criticized for giving highly inadequate or reductive images of the complex ways scholars in diverse fields relate to the question of quality (Karpik 2011; Gingras 2016). The overall aim of this exercise is to unravel the relationship between the dominating scholars in the field and thereby to foster what Bourdieu calls Bepistemic reflexivity^, i.e. a better understanding of the theoretical perspectives within which research is conducted and the various positions scholars engaged in the field can potentially uptake (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992, 40–41)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
