Could Distributed Peer Review Better Decide Grant Funding?
The landscape of academic grant funding is notoriously competitive and plagued by lengthy, bureaucratic processes, exacerbated by difficulties in finding willing reviewers. Distributed […]
The founder of the academic publisher SAGE has given the Social Science Research Council $3 million from her own pocket to advance […]
The impact of John Nash’s initial work has been immense over the past 65 years. It seems certain that in his absence, the frameworks and mathematical language he refined and developed will continue to provide new insights into a diverse range of problems.
Making decisions without data soils the public policy process with ideology, partisan politics, and misinformation, all things the late Janet Norwood abhorred. Her voice, commitment, and professionalism will be sorely missed.
The appointment of climate skeptic Bjorn Lomborg has focused attention on a newish metric for assessing academic importance, the H-Index.
The scientific study of fairness in the workplace engages Purdue’s Deborah Rupp. Hear her explain her cutting-edge social science work, its applications to the real world, and why we should fund such work.
Republican-penned legislation that among other things cuts in half National Science Foundation funding for social science research passed the House of Representatives today.
In this Social Science Bites podcast, social theorist Steven Lukes tells interviewer Nigel Warburton how Émile Durkheim’s exploration of issues like labor, suicide and religion proved intriguing to a young academic and enduring for an established one.
Options for changing legislation that would almost halve social science funding from the National Science Foundation are narrowing.