Social Sciences Responding to the Year 1989 in Central and Eastern Europe: A Comparison Among Disciplines

The comparative study of the history of various social science disciplines remains an infrequent undertaking. The works that present a comprehensive picture of all or most social sciences (e.g., Wagner, Wittrock & Whitley, 1991; Porter & Ross, 2003; Backhouse & Fontaine, 2010; Fleck, Duller & Karády, 2018) contain only a limited comparative element. Arguably drawing broad comparisons among the histories of different social sciences is unlikely to move beyond generalities. But by limiting the scope of attention to specific cases and relatively uniform contexts, it is possible to gain insight into the distinct ways in which various disciplines respond to specific social developments, are shaped by them and shape these in turn.

This paper outlines a comparative analysis of the encounter of sociology, political science, economics, and psychology with the processes referred to variously as democratic transition, market reforms or post-communist transformation in Central and Eastern Europe after 1989. Faced with an instance of major social change, the social science disciplines were differentially predisposed to adapt and expand their research agendas, enter the field as active shapers of social reality, provide support and legitimation to the parties involved in political and ideological struggles, attract institutional resources, establish bridges with social scientists from the region, etc. How can be described the response of each of these social sciences to post-communist transformation in intellectual, institutional, political terms?

The aim of this presentation is to point out the similarities and differences among individual disciplines and to offer explanations for the varying responses observed. The second aim is to reflect on the methodological requirements and limitations associated with comparative research of the history of various academic disciplines. The paper is based on a critical review of the literature and on case studies of selected institutions, personalities, publications, and policy issues.