{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025454545454545455, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.592814371257485, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Networks in philosophy: Social networks and employment in academic philosophy

In recent years, the “science of science” has combined computational methods with novel data sources to understand the dynamics of research communities. Many of the questions investigated by science of science are also relevant to academic philosophy. To what extent can the discipline be divided into subfields with different methods and topics? How are prestige and credit distributed across the discipline? And how do these factors interact with other factors, such as gender, to shape job market outcomes? Using job market data for anglophone academic philosophy, this paper finds, first, evidence that is consistent with the analytic- continental divide but is also consistent with other, more complex ways of organizing academic philosophy into distinct intellectual traditions; second, a clear prestige hierarchy, dividing Ph.D. programs into two distinct prestige categories; and, third, evidence that gender, prestige, and country have notable effects on academic job market outcomes for recent philosophy Ph.Ds.