This study presents a comprehensive analysis of the achievements of Chinese and Russian scientific circles in the field of studying the "image of China in Russia." The object of the research is the methodological approaches and substantive conclusions of the two academic traditions, examined through the lens of comparative analysis. The research applies methods of systematization and comparative analysis, allowing for the identification of not only obvious discrepancies but also hidden parallels in the development of this field of knowledge in the two countries. The conducted study revealed five stable paradigms in the Chinese scientific tradition: comprehensive studies, media analysis, public opinion studies, analysis of literary images, and intellectual history research. Despite the methodological diversity, the Chinese school is characterized by certain limitations, specifically insufficient attention to historical retrospection and fragmentary use of archival materials. The Russian research tradition, in turn, demonstrates three main directions: generalizing studies, periodization studies, and regional studies, which are distinguished by a rich source base but insufficient theoretical reflection. The main innovative contribution of this research lies in identifying a fundamental problem common to both academic traditions – the lack of specialized empirical studies based on archival documents and memoirs as primary sources. This finding not only reveals the structural limitations of existing research but also defines a promising direction for scientific breakthrough, which is of great importance for the development of the history of mutual perception between China and Russia and for promoting interdisciplinary research. The conclusions of the study create a theoretical foundation for future inquiries in the fields of imagology and cross-cultural studies.
Dandan Song (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: