Suchergebnisse

COVID‐19 presents an existential challenge for millions of people and a generational challenge for the globe. Scientific research is the primary vehicle in humanity's attempts to understand the virus and mitigate its effects. Research on the pathogen is critically important. At the same time, COVID‐19's consequences are due to more than the pathogen. Social and behavioral science research is essential in understanding how to achieve the highest possible health and safety levels, and how to preserve and improve quality of life, within complex and interdependent societies. This article describes the social sciences' role in this challenge and offers examples of its insights.

It is a great honor to have been invited to deliver the Ithiel de Sola Pool lecture. Professor de Sola Pool had a tremendous influence on scholarship and practice. His work describes the ways in which evolving technologies fundamentally alter communicative expectations and social outcomes. Years after their publication, works such as Technologies of Freedom (1984) continue to provide insight about how the networked communications are changing the world. Professor de Sola Pool's work is of great public value. In what follows, I want to focus our attention on the value of social science today. Adapted from the source document.

It is a great honor to have been invited to deliver the Ithiel de Sola Pool lecture. Professor de Sola Pool had a tremendous influence on scholarship and practice. His work describes the ways in which evolving technologies fundamentally alter communicative expectations and social outcomes. Years after their publication, works such asTechnologies of Freedom(1984) continue to provide insight about how the networked communications are changing the world. Professor de Sola Pool's work is of great public value. In what follows, I want to focus our attention on the value of social science today.

Editor's note This well circulated but heretofore unpublished report is the summary statement of an interdisciplinary meeting of scholars convened by the National Science Foundation in Arlington, Virginia on June 28, 2010. The workshop, which was funded by the NSF's Political Science Program (Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences Grant #1037831), was convened to answer two compelling questions: Are studies of social behavior that build from discoveries about genes and/or cognition of greater social and scientific value than studies of the same topics that ignore such factors? And, how can fundable research on genes, cognition, and politics generate transformative scientific practices, infrastructure, and findings of high social value? Assembled for the workshop were a group of scholars representing diverse yet increasingly connected research areas, including genetics, cognitive science and neuroscience, decision making and risk analysis, economics, political science, and sociology. The resulting report outlines the substantial challenges facing interdisciplinary research but also describes the considerable contributions to knowledge that could result from sustained collaborations between biologists, geneticists, and brain scientists on the one hand and social scientists on the other. Following this main report are three white papers by Jeremy Freese. Elizabeth Hammock, and Rose McDermott, which address importmant considerations related to the discussion. For a download of the full report, see http://www.isr.umich.edu.cps/workshop.Welcome.html.

AbstractIn the 2008 election, Barack Obama's campaign brought many new voters to the polls. Were these new voters necessary for Obama's victory? In this study, I find that they were not. The basis of this finding is an examination of decisions made by people who voted for George W. Bush in 2004. I show that Bush voters' decisions not to vote or to support Obama were a sufficient condition for Obama's victory.