Q-SpAM: How to Efficiently Measure Similarity in Online Research

2020 ◽  
pp. 004912412091493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex Koch ◽  
Felix Speckmann ◽  
Christian Unkelbach
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Spatial Arrangement ◽  
Online Research ◽  
Stimulus Similarity ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Large Stimulus ◽  
Computer Screen ◽  
Similarity Data ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
Do So

Measuring the similarity of stimuli is of great interest to a variety of social scientists. Spatial arrangement by dragging and dropping “more similar” targets closer together on the computer screen is a precise and efficient method to measure stimulus similarity. We present Qualtrics-spatial arrangement method (Q-SpAM), a feature-rich and user-friendly online version of spatial arrangement. Combined with crowdsourcing platforms, Q-SpAM provides fast and affordable access to similarity data even for large stimulus sets. Participants may spatially arrange up to 100 words or images, randomly selected targets, self-selected targets, self-generated targets, and targets self-marked in different colors. These and other Q-SpAM features can be combined. We exemplify how to collect, process, and visualize similarity data with Q-SpAM and provide R and Excel scripts to do so. We then illustrate Q-SpAM’s versatility for social science, concluding that Q-SpAM is a reliable and valid method to measure the similarity of lots of stimuli with little effort.

scholarly journals Explanation, prediction, and causality: Three sides of the same coin?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duncan J Watts ◽  
Emorie D Beck ◽  
Elisa Jayne Bienenstock ◽  
Jake Bowers ◽  
Aaron Frank ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Predictive Accuracy ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Predictive Performance ◽  
Computational Social Science ◽  
Machine Learning Algorithms ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Common Task ◽  
The Common ◽  
Do So

In this essay we make four interrelated points. First, we reiterate previous arguments (Kleinberg et al 2015) that forecasting problems are more common in social science than is often appreciated. From this observation it follows that social scientists should care about predictive accuracy in addition to unbiased or consistent estimation of causal relationships. Second, we argue that social scientists should be interested in prediction even if they have no interest in forecasting per se. Whether they do so explicitly or not, that is, causal claims necessarily make predictions; thus it is both fair and arguably useful to hold them accountable for the accuracy of the predictions they make. Third, we argue that prediction, used in either of the above two senses, is a useful metric for quantifying progress. Important differences between social science explanations and machine learning algorithms notwithstanding, social scientists can still learn from approaches like the Common Task Framework (CTF) which have successfully driven progress in certain fields of AI over the past 30 years (Donoho, 2015). Finally, we anticipate that as the predictive performance of forecasting models and explanations alike receives more attention, it will become clear that it is subject to some upper limit which lies well below deterministic accuracy for many applications of interest (Martin et al 2016). Characterizing the properties of complex social systems that lead to higher or lower predictive limits therefore poses an interesting challenge for computational social science.

Locating Experts in the Basic Framework

2021 ◽  
pp. 130-152
Author(s):  
Jennifer Hochschild
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Public Authority ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Basic Framework ◽  
Do So ◽  
Science Disciplines

Chapter 6 examines how various categories of experts fit in the quadrants of the basic framework, and why. It uses three sources of evidence: a coded database of almost 2,000 genomics-related articles by legal scholars and social scientists in thirteen disciplines; two online, open-ended surveys of several hundred social science experts who responded to questions organized around the basic framework; and almost sixty in-person, open-ended interviews with genomics experts, many in positions of public authority. The chapter shows that the most methodologically individualist and most scientific social science disciplines are especially likely to fall into the “Enthusiastic” quadrant, whereas the most humanistic are least likely to do so. Individual experts range across the cells of the basic typology, with views ultimately resting on judgments about humans’ capacity to learn and to act for the good of others.

Optimales Layout einer Walderschliessung

2016 ◽  
Vol 167 (5) ◽  
pp. 294-301
Author(s):  
Leo Bont
Keyword(s):  
Road Network ◽  
Spatial Arrangement ◽  
Problem Situation ◽  
Optimal Layout ◽  
Forest Road ◽  
The Road ◽  
Network Cost ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
Short Time

Optimal layout of a forest road network The road network is the backbone of forest management. When creating or redesigning a forest road network, one important question is how to shape the layout, this means to fix the spatial arrangement and the dimensioning standard of the roads. We consider two kinds of layout problems. First, new forest road network in an area without any such development yet, and second, redesign of existing road network for actual requirements. For each problem situation, we will present a method that allows to detect automatically the optimal road and harvesting layout. The method aims to identify a road network that concurrently minimizes the harvesting cost, the road network cost (construction and maintenance) and the hauling cost over the entire life cycle. Ecological issues can be considered as well. The method will be presented and discussed with the help of two case studies. The main benefit of the application of optimization tools consists in an objective-based planning, which allows to check and compare different scenarios and objectives within a short time. The responses coming from the case study regions were highly positive: practitioners suggest to make those methods a standard practice and to further develop the prototype to a user-friendly expert software.

Reflections on Local Population Studies and Social Science History

2018 ◽  
pp. 43-51
Author(s):  
Osamu Saito
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Population Studies ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Local Source ◽  
Personal Reflection ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Source Materials

This personal reflection of more than 40 years' work on the supply of labour in a household context discusses the relationship between social science history (the application to historical phenomena of the tools developed by social scientists) and local population studies. The paper concludes that historians working on local source materials can give something new back to social scientists and social science historians, urging them to remake their tools.

ISLAMIC SOCIAL SCIENCES

1988 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mona Abul Fadl
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Belief Systems ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Social Foundations ◽  
Body Of Knowledge ◽  
Human Value ◽  
The Social ◽  
Western Values ◽  
Culture Brokers

The need for a relevant and instrumental body of knowledge that can secure the taskof historical reconstruction in Muslim societies originally inspired the da’wa for the Islamizationof knowledge. The immediate targets for this da’wa were the social sciences for obvious reasons.Their field directly impinges on the organization of human societies and as such carries intothe area of human value and belief systems. The fact that such a body of knowledge alreadyexisted and that the norms for its disciplined pursuit were assumed in the dominant practiceconfronted Muslim scholars with the context for addressing the issues at stake. How relevantwas current social science to Muslim needs and aspirations? Could it, in its present formand emphasis, provide Muslims with the framework for operationalizing their values in theirhistorical present? How instrumental is it in shaping the social foundations vital for the Muslimfuture? Is instrumentality the only criteria for such evaluations? In seeking to answer thesequestions the seeds are sown for a new orientation in the social sciences. This orientationrepresents the legitimate claims and aspirations of a long silent/silenced world culture.In locating the activities of Muslim social scientists today it is important to distinguishbetween two currents. The first is in its formative stages as it sets out to rediscover the worldfrom the perspective of a recovered sense of identity and in terms of its renewed culturalaffinities. Its preoccupations are those of the Muslim revival. The other current is constitutedof the remnants of an earlier generation of modernizers who still retain a faith in the universalityof Western values. Demoralized by the revival, as much as by their own cultural alientation,they seek to deploy their reserves of scholarship and logistics to recover lost ground. Bymodifying their strategy and revalorizing the legacy they hope that, as culture-brokers, theymight be more effective where others have failed. They seek to pre-empt the cultural revivalby appropriating its symbols and reinterpreting the Islamic legacy to make it more tractableto modernity. They blame Orientalism for its inherent fixations and strive to redress its selfimposedlimitations. Their efforts may frequently intersect with those of the Islamizing current,but should clearly not be confused with them. For all the tireless ingenuity, these effortsare more conspicuous for their industry than for their originality. Between the new breadof renovationists and the old guard of ‘modernizers’, the future of an Islamic Social Scienceclearly lies with the efforts of the former.Within the Islamizing current it is possible to distinguish three principal trends. The firstopts for a radical perspective and takes its stand on epistemological grounds. It questionsthe compatibility of the current social sciences on account of their rootedness in the paradigmof the European Enlightenment and its attendant naturalistic and positivist biases. Consistencedemands a concerted e€fort to generate alternative paradigms for a new social science fromIslamic epistemologies. In contrast, the second trend opts for a more pragmatic approachwhich assumes that it is possible to interact within the existing framework of the disciplinesafter adapting them to Islamic values. The problem with modern sciene is ethical, notepistemological, and by recasting it accordingly, it is possible to benefit from its strengthsand curtail its derogatory consequences. The third trend focuses on the Muslim scholar, rather ...

Second Annual Conference of the “ASEAN Muslim Social Scientists’ Forum”

1988 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-306
Author(s):  
Hussain Mutalib
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Southeast Asian ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Asian Region ◽  
Select Group ◽  
Islamic Resurgence ◽  
Closed Door

The Muslim Social Science Scholars’ Forum of ASEAN (Associationof Southeast Asian Nations) held its Second Meeting in Bangkok, Thailandfrom Mubrram 20-23, 1409lSeptember 1-4, 1988, under the auspices of theFoundation for Democracy and Development Studies. The theme for themeeting was “Muslim Scholars and Social Science Research,” aimed atdocumenting, discussing and analyzing the types of scholarship or researchthat have been done about Muslims in the Southeast Asian region, particularlywithin the ASEAN countries.A select group of Muslim social science scholars (together with someMuslim politicians) from the countries within ASEAN, except Brunei, wereinvited to the “Forum.” They included: Drs. Dawan Raharjo and NurcholisMajid, and Professor Moeslim (Indonesia), Drs. Surin Pitsuwan, SeneeMadmarn and Chaiwat (Thailand), Drs. Yusof Talib and Hussain Mutalib(Singapore), Professors Taib Osman and Wan Hashim and Umar Farouq(Malaysia), and Drs. Carmen Abubakar, Madale and Mastura (Philippines).All participants were either presenters of papers or discussants.Throughout the four-day deliberations, participants discussed the typesof studies and research that have been the focus of scholars studying Muslimcommunities in the ASEAN region. Some titles of papers included: “MuslimStudies in the Phillipines;” “Social Science Research in Thailand;” and “SocialScience Research in Malaysia: the Case of Islamic Resurgence.”Given the “closed-door” ‘nature of the meeting (participation was byinvitation only), there was adequate time for a more intensive, frank andthorough discussions of the papers. Problems and issues were aired and posed,and alternative options offered by participants. For every paper, there wasa discussant; hence, the issues that came out of the papers managed to beseen, discussed and appreciated from a more complete and balancedperspective.By and large, the Bangkok meeting was a successful one. Theapproximately twenty participants were generally pleased with the high qualityof papers presented and the sense of brotherhood that prevailed. The warmhospitality of the hosts from Thailand was also appreciated ...

Capitalism Beyond Mutuality?

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Contract ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Business Practice ◽  
Business Leaders ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Economic Paradigm ◽  
The Social ◽  
Modern Economic ◽  
Great Output

Our quest for prosperity has produced great output but not always great outcomes. The list of concerns is growing and familiar. Fundamentally, when it comes to well-being, fairness, and the scope of our humanity, the modern economic system still leaves much to be desired. In turn, trust in business and the liberal market system (aka “capitalism”) has been declining and regulation has been rising. A variety of forces—civic, economic, and intellectual—have been probing for better alternatives. The contributions in this volume, coauthored by eminent philosophers, social scientists, and a handful of thoughtful business leaders, are submitted in this spirit. The thrust of the work is conveyed in the volume’s titular question: Capitalism Beyond Mutuality? Mutuality, or the exchange of benefits, has been established as the prime principle of interaction in addressing the chronic dilemma of human interdependence. Mutuality is a fundament in the social contract approach and it serves us well. Yet, to address the concerns outlined here, we must help evolve an economic paradigm where mutuality is more systematically complemented by reasoned and elective morality. Otherwise the state will remain the sole (if inadequate) protector and buffer between market and society. Hence, rather than just regulate power we must also educate power. Philosophy has a natural role, especially when education is the preferred vehicle of transformation. Accordingly, the essays in this volume integrate philosophy and social science to outline and explore concrete approaches to these important concerns emanating from business practice and theory.

Why they shared: recovering early arguments for sharing social scientific data

2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-119
Author(s):  
Emily Hauptmann
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Financial Stability ◽  
Social Research ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Ethical Imperative ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
The University ◽  
University Consortium

ArgumentMost social scientists today think of data sharing as an ethical imperative essential to making social science more transparent, verifiable, and replicable. But what moved the architects of some of the U.S.’s first university-based social scientific research institutions, the University of Michigan’s Institute for Social Research (ISR), and its spin-off, the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR), to share their data? Relying primarily on archived records, unpublished personal papers, and oral histories, I show that Angus Campbell, Warren Miller, Philip Converse, and others understood sharing data not as an ethical imperative intrinsic to social science but as a useful means to the diverse ends of financial stability, scholarly and institutional autonomy, and epistemological reproduction. I conclude that data sharing must be evaluated not only on the basis of the scientific ideals its supporters affirm, but also on the professional objectives it serves.

scholarly journals Integrating virtual reality in qualitative research methods: Making a case for the VR-assisted interview

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 205979912110307
Author(s):  
Dennis Mathysen ◽  
Ignace Glorieux
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Structured Interview ◽  
Good Effect ◽  
Valuable Alternative ◽  
Specialized Hardware ◽  
User Friendly ◽  
First Time

Virtual reality (VR) is still very much a niche technology despite its increasing popularity since recent years. VR has now reached a point where it can offer photorealistic experiences, while also being consumer-friendly and affordable. However, so far only a very limited amount of software has been developed for the specific purpose of conducting (social science) research. In this article, we illustrate that integrating virtual reality to good effect in social science research does not necessarily require specialized hardware or software, an abundance of expertise regarding VR-technology or even a large budget. We do this by discussing our use of a method we have come to call ‘VR-assisted interviews’: conducting a (semi-structured) interview while respondents are confronted with a virtual environment viewed via a VR-headset. This method allows respondents to focus on what they are seeing and experiencing, instead of having them worry about how to operate a device and navigate an interface they are using for the first time. ‘VR-assisted interviews’ are very user-friendly for respondents but also limits options for interactiveness. We believe this method can be a valuable alternative, both because of methodological and practical considerations, for more complex applications of VR-technology in social science research.

Politics and Research: Epistemological Moments

1990 ◽  
Vol 15 (01) ◽  
pp. 149-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adelaide H. Villmoare
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Law And Society ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Relationship

In reading the essays by David M. Trubek and John Esser and Boaventura de Sousa Santos, I thought about what I call epistemological moments that have provided contexts within which to understand the relationship between social science research and politics. I will sketch four moments and suggest that I find one of them more compelling than the others because it speaks particularly to social scientists with critical, democratic ambitions and to Trubek and Esser's concerns about politics and the intellectual vitality of the law and society movement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document