A space to explore, share and shape the issues facing social scientists
Gina Neff doesn’t approach smart devices as a Luddite or even that much of an alarmist; she bought first-generation Fitbit when they were brand new and virtually unknown (all of five years ago!). She approaches them as a sociologist, “looking at the practices of people who use digital devices to monitor, map and measure different aspects of their life.”
Two academics who have integrated what might have once seemed like non-economic externalities into economic models have been awarded the 2018 Nobel Prize in economics. The winners are William D. Nordhaus of Yale University, cited for integrating climate change into macroeconomic analysis, and Paul M. Romer of New York University’s Stern School of Business, cited doing the same with technological innovations.
What exactly does the tech industry want from social and behavioral scientists? That was the focus of a SAGE Publishing-sponsored panel at the annual meeting of the Association for Psychological Science In San Francisco this summer. Panelists were four representatives from tech, ranging from big players like Google to startups like Jaunt.
The big questions posed by our digital future sit at the intersection of technology and ethics. This is complex territory that requires input from experts in many different fields, including the social sciences, if we are to navigate it successfully. A new report makes an effort to give a first draft of that necessary input.
New technology has, and is, changing a lot of the mechanics of social and behavioral science research, but how much is the underlying enterprise itself changing as a result? This is a key question Ann Sloan Devlin, author of the newly released ‘The Research Experience: Planning, Conducting, and Reporting Research,’ addresses in this interview.
These aren’t the best of times for reference librarians, but the challenges leave only one option — to get with the times.
Earlier this month Aime Ballard-Wood, director of publications for the Association for Psychological Science, discussed recent efforts for heightened dissemination […]
Technology may bring efficiencies to higher education, argues David Glance, but only if the expectations of both the suppliers and consumers fundamentally change.
A just-released project asking if the digital tsunami is leaving trust in scholarly communication all wet found that the academy still runs to traditional means to determine reliability.
The line between studying online and studying on campus is increasingly blurry, argues tech thinker David Glance.
In the case of higher education the discussion of technology’s influence is often superficial, repetitious and disappointing, argues Tom Cochrane of Queensland University of Technology. It’s too often context free, and about being a university student and/or academic.
Michael Lubell, accomplished professor of physics, explains why the social sciences are critical to the advance of science and technology, and explains why we need to protect the social sciences from political attempts to de-fund them.
