  We argue that the communication structures in the Chinese social sciences
have not yet been sufficiently reformed. Citation patterns among Chinese
domestic journals in three subject areas -- political science and marxism,
library and information science, and economics -- are compared with their
counterparts internationally. Like their colleagues in the natural and life
sciences, Chinese scholars in the social sciences provide fewer references to
journal publications than their international counterparts; like their
international colleagues, social scientists provide fewer references than
natural sciences. The resulting citation networks, therefore, are sparse.
Nevertheless, the citation structures clearly suggest that the Chinese social
sciences are far less specialized in terms of disciplinary delineations than
their international counterparts. Marxism studies are more established than
political science in China. In terms of the impact of the Chinese political
system on academic fields, disciplines closely related to the political system
are less specialized than those weakly related. In the discussion section, we
explore reasons that may cause the current stagnation and provide policy
recommendations.
