This article suggests a comparative field analytical approach to fields of cultural production. Combining concepts from field analysis and focusing on homology with topic modeling and multiple correspondence analysis, we compare four scientific disciplines and show homological structures along both internal and external principles of differentiation. The empirical analysis suggests that despite major differences between the four disciplines (biology, chemistry, economics, and sociology), they are structured along similar principles. Moreover, cognitive distinctions in certain disciplines can be correlated with institutional properties and symbolic hierarchies. Despite the similarities, the analysis also shows important differences between the four disciplines related to internal organization and their relations to both other scientific disciplines and the field of power. The article shows how topic modeling and multiple correspondence analysis can cross-fertilize to understand how fields of cultural production differentiate and how cultural practices (here scientific knowledge production) relate to social structures (here academic hierarchies and prestige). The method hence allows for comparison between fields of cultural production while retaining a nuanced analysis of specific fields and the practices that constitute them.

中文翻译：

---

文化生产领域的同源性。来自欧洲科学领域的证据


本文提出了一种对文化生产领域的比较田野分析方法。结合场分析的概念，并将同源性与主题建模和多重对应分析相结合，我们比较了四个科学学科，并展示了基于内部和外部差异化原则的同源结构。实证分析表明，尽管这四个学科（生物学、化学、经济学和社会学）之间存在重大差异，但它们的结构是按照相似的原则进行的。此外，某些学科的认知差异可能与机构属性和符号层次结构相关联。尽管存在相似之处，但分析还显示了与内部组织相关的四个学科之间的重要差异，以及它们与其他科学学科和权力领域的关系。本文展示了主题建模和多重对应分析如何相互融合，以了解文化生产领域如何区分，以及文化实践（这里是科学知识生产）与社会结构（这里是学术等级制度和声望）的关系。因此，该方法允许对文化生产领域进行比较，同时保留对特定领域和构成它们的实践的细致分析。