• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site
Of all publications in the section: 419
Sort:
by name
by year
Article
Косалс Л. Я., Ячник М. М. Общественные науки и современность. 2020. № 2. С. 5-24.

The focus of the paper is on the study of the emergence of the market for artificial intelligence technologies in Russia based on both expert poll and survey of CEOs of the Russian industrial enterprises. It includes two parts. The first contains the methodology of the research, a description of the market agents, and the features of the product. In the second part, the authors analyze the interactions of the agents and the role of the state in the regulation of the market. This emerging market combines the features of the markets for software products and consulting services, which offer solutions, i.e. unique personalized products tailored to the needs and conditions of specific companies. In spite of fast growth, the development of the market faced significant obstacles, which can slow it down in the future.

Added: Jun 21, 2020
Article
Косалс Л. Я., Ячник М. М. Общественные науки и современность. 2020. № 3. С. 5-17.

In the paper on the analysis of the interactions of the agents in the market of artificial intelligence argued that in spite of rapid development, there are some hindrances for its progress, which can lead to the fact that its real growth rate would be lower than expected. The features of the socioeconomic system that has developed in Russia impose additional restrictions on the development of this market putting at risk of a potential lag of the country in the 21st century in the context of the unfolding 4th industrial revolution.

Added: Aug 6, 2020
Article
Анишина В. И., Гаджиев Г. А. Общественные науки и современность. 2006. № 6. С. 5-14.
Added: Jun 6, 2013
Article
Магун В. С., Магун А. В. Общественные науки и современность. 2009. № 3. С. 102-113.
Added: Jan 10, 2013
Article
Магун В. С. Общественные науки и современность. 2009. № 2 . С. 102-113.
Added: Jan 17, 2010
Article
Магун В. С. Общественные науки и современность. 2009. № 3. С. 32-44.
Added: Jan 17, 2010
Article
Покровский Н. Е. Общественные науки и современность. 2009. № 1. С. 58-68.
Added: Oct 16, 2013
Article
Матвеев С. Р. Общественные науки и современность. 2014. № 6. С. 141-148.

The article reconstructs the historical development of a research method known as Social Network Analysis (SNA). The heuristic capability of the method on the basis of intellectual history is analyzed as well.

Added: Jun 10, 2014
Article
Мусихин Г. И. Общественные науки и современность. 2015. № 6. С. 45-57.

The author displays that due to symbolic thinking people can act at the same time bothe as subjects and objects of social life. The article proves that the analysis of the language of politics, the competence of politics, and political information are considered by the academic community as independent modes of political reality. However, the political actors speak, think and know in political context simultaneously. Therefore, the conceptual focus of the research isn’t on the political ontology, epistemology and semantics as such but on the relationships in the political community. It is shown that the symbolic space of politics emerges as a spontaneous nonconventional social interaction creating a stable (and already conventional) model of relations, which isn’t fi xed in the framework of the positivist approach. The author argues that the understanding of language as a social symbolization goes beyond the perception of political character as a “world view” or “mirror of reality.” The process of political symbolization is a collective interaction of meanings not just reproducing the existing meanings but generating new ones as well. This gives the political symbolization a universal communicative function.

Added: Dec 21, 2015
Article
Яковлев А. А. Общественные науки и современность. 2012. № 5. С. 54-70.
Added: Dec 24, 2012
Article
Ясин Е. Г. Общественные науки и современность. 2010. № 6. С. 17-21.
Added: Sep 30, 2012
Article
Якобсон Л. И., Санович С. В. Общественные науки и современность. 2009. № 4. С. 21-34.
Added: Jan 22, 2013
Article
Касамара В. А., Сорокина А. А. Общественные науки и современность. 2017. № 6. С. 55-66.

In this article, we analyze how students studying at Moscow universities perceive historical events of 1917, 1937, 1991, and 1993. We look at two groups of students: those who have taken the standardized test (the Unified State Exam) in history, and those who have not. The study shows that neither of the two groups has a firm grasp or understanding of 20th century history, as they can usually only say a few words about the events. The more recent the event, the lower the students' knowledge of the event. The authors conclude that history lessons in schools should be restructured and redistributed, and that memory politics should be transformed with attention to new channels of communication that are popular among young people today.

Added: Jul 9, 2017
Article
Оболонский А. В. Общественные науки и современность. 2010. № 3. С. 135-151.
Added: Sep 30, 2012
Article
Печерская Н. В. Общественные науки и современность. 2001. № 2. С. 77-88.
Added: Jan 10, 2011
Article
Краснов М. А. Общественные науки и современность. 2010. № 4. С. 37-49.
Added: Oct 1, 2012
Article
Мерсиянова И. В. Общественные науки и современность. 2009. № 4. С. 35-45.
Added: Jan 19, 2010
Article
Зубаревич Н.В. Общественные науки и современность. 2016. № 5. С. 5-18.
Added: Nov 13, 2017
Article
Зубаревич Н.В. Общественные науки и современность. 2017. № 5. С. 5-8.

The article deals with the new Russia's crises and their impact on the regions social development including labor markets, household incomes, consumption and regions budget expenditures. The focus is on the new crisis regional differentiation and implication for different territories, big cities and towns as well as rural settlements and population.

Added: Nov 12, 2017
Article
Савельева И. М. Общественные науки и современность. 2016. № 1. С. 157-169.

The aims of this article are: (1) identifying new tendencies in social history that emerged in the 21st century, (2) analyzing its current theoretical premises, (3) identifying the most rapidly and intensively developing fields of research, intra- and interdisciplinary alliances, and central themes. Furthermore, the study delineates emergent research fields and subject matters and traces the development of the subdiscipline’s conceptual framework and its main categories. Both cognitive and institutional aspects of social history’s current condition are analyzed (e.g. loss of leadership, the scholarly community lacking a ‘midpoint’ notwithstanding the numerous journals, associations, and old academic elite still persisting). These changes assessment is based on a cover-to-cover reading of a large body of literature on social history, which will make it possible to proceed from surface judgments to more thorough knowledge of what is happening to this discipline today.

Added: Dec 1, 2015