Sealab II and Skylab

2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 551-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Layne Karafantis
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Extreme Environments ◽  
Space Station ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Earth Orbit ◽  
National Defense ◽  
The Cold War

Sealab II, an underwater habitat experiment conducted by the Navy in 1965, and Skylab, NASA’s proto-space station launched into Earth orbit in 1973, are examples of extreme environments in which psychological research was carried out on the inhabitants of these spaces. These vessels showcase attention paid to psychological field research during the Cold War, a time when isolated confined environments and small group studies were funded under federal auspices for national defense purposes. These case studies challenge historians to re-evaluate existing definitions of the laboratory and of fieldwork, as their application to novel spaces in postwar social science research differed from prior uses of these terms.

Summer Studies, Centers, and a Governmentwide Clearinghouse

2019 ◽  
pp. 91-144
Author(s):  
Michael C. Desch
Keyword(s):  
Cold War ◽  
Social Science ◽  
National Security ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Key Policy ◽  
High Standards ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
Policy Problems

This chapter examines how the Cold War witnessed continuing government interest in drawing on social science as a resource for national security policymaking. Despite this continuing interest, there was just below the surface an undercurrent of dissatisfaction with academic social science as it became more oriented to producing basic, as opposed to applied, research. Government funders increasingly complained that basic social science research was couched in excessive jargon and deplored the unwillingness of scholars to provide policy-relevant findings unless they could meet very high standards of scientific proof. This led to an ongoing search by national security policymakers for alternative arrangements through which to tap social science expertise. What early Cold War national security policymakers wanted was social science that was accessible to the layman, struck a balance of theory and practice, and engaged the key policy problems they were grappling with.

scholarly journals Institutional Review Board and International Field Research in Conflict Zones

2014 ◽  
Vol 47 (04) ◽  
pp. 840-844 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srobana Bhattacharya
Keyword(s):  
Human Subjects ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Political Conflict ◽  
Institutional Review Board ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Conflict Zones ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
The Many

ABSTRACTResearch on political conflict can benefit immensely from fieldwork. However, the Institutional Review Board (IRB) process is elaborate and daunting that discourages rather than encourages this type of research. Existing policies often are insensitive to the many uncertainties related to field research abroad, especially in conflict zones. Three reasons for this are identified in this article. First, the federal regulations to protect human subjects of social science research are most suitable for biomedical sciences. Second, there is huge gap between “procedural ethics” and “ethics in practice.” Third, there is a lack of communication or dialogue between researchers and IRBs. After discussing these reasons, I offer the following suggestions: bridging the gap between the researcher and the IRB; reducing delays in the IRB approval and revision process; encouraging collaboration and dialogue among researchers; and advocating a proactive stance by academic associations.

scholarly journals Interpreting and presenting marginalized voices through intersubjective accounts

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
David P Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Power Relations ◽  
Postcolonial Theory ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Community Empowerment ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Doctoral Research ◽  
Unique Approach

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce a unique approach to accessing, interpreting, and presenting issues concerning the lives of social science research participants. It particularly focuses on accessing those considered to be economically, socially, or politically marginalized and where there is reliance upon intersubjective accounts in two languages. Design/methodology/approach – The conceptual and empirical material referred to in this paper is drawn from the author’s doctoral research of a Fair Trade case study in Malawi. The approach presented is influenced by concepts derived from postcolonial theory, grounded theory, and intersubjectivity. Findings – For the community empowerment research focus it was important to provide space to capture voices of all participants, accounting for the hierarchical socio-political context in which people were embedded. This required the use of interpreters, introducing challenges related to intersubjectivity such as recognizing and accounting for positionalities and impressions of multiple parties collaborating in the process of collecting and interpreting qualitative research material. Practical implications – Investing in trained and engaged interpreters, using pilot interviews, including participants’ data in the field research design process, and capturing marginalized voices helps a researcher to mitigate challenges related to bias and power relations. Originality/value – Recognizing inherent shortcomings related to interpreter-facilitated research and power relations, the framework presented provides a reflective and practical methodological approach for qualitative researchers.

scholarly journals Extending Humanity’s Reach: A Public-Private Framework for Space Exploration

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 75-98
Author(s):  
Jack B. Chaben
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Space Shuttle ◽  
Outer Space ◽  
Space Station ◽  
The United States ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Space Race ◽  
The Cold War

The Cold War initiated not only rapid weaponization campaigns within the United States and the Soviet Union, but launched a space race between the ideological opponents. The Soviet Union claimed an early victory by becoming the first nation to launch a satellite into space. Despite the United States' rough start, the country triumphed during its Apollo Program to become the leader in space. Treaties and international norms emerged throughout this time to prevent these technologically raging nations from weaponizing the expansive environment of outer space, but the resulting protections against national ownership of space limited incentives for future deep space travel. As the U.S. Space Shuttle program came to an end in 2011, the United States forfeit its capabilities to transport humans to the International Space Station. This apparent abandonment of outer space, however, began to reveal the seminal role of the commercial space industry and its revolutionary technologies. This article traces the transition from the Cold War-era space race to today’s robust public-private expansion into space. It highlights the foundational importance of international cooperation to protect the interests of private companies, and presents a model of cooperative succession between space agencies and companies to send humans to Mars.

Anxious? Just Google It: Social Ecological Factors of Internet Search Records on Anxiety

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Takeshi Hamamura ◽  
Christian Shaunlyn Chan
Keyword(s):  
Social Science Research ◽  
Ecological Factors ◽  
Population Level ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Internet Search ◽  
Major Disaster ◽  
Search Data ◽  
Google Search

Records of Internet search are increasingly used in social science research. Three studies reported here tested (a) whether population-level anxiety is reflected in Internet search data and (b) the socio-ecological and cultural factors of anxiety. Using data from Japan, we found that the Google search rates of anxiety are associated with self-report anxiety (Study 1), and that the search rates increased following a major disaster (Study 2). These findings suggest that anxiety is searched more often on the Internet when and where people are feeling anxious. However, while search rates of anxiety increased since 2010, there was no sign of worsening anxiety among Japanese in two large national data on self-report anxiety (Study 1). Study 3 used search data to examine an anxiety-related cultural phenomenon. Consistent with a lay belief that is rarely empirically examined, we found that anxiety among Japanese increases in spring when millions in the country make school and career transitions. This pattern was somewhat more pronounced in large cities and was not evident in other negative emotions examined. Together, these findings add to psychologists’ understanding of anxiety particularly its vulnerability to environmental threat and social disconnection. These findings also demonstrate the potential of Internet search data in advancing psychological research, particularly in examining mental processes’ socio-ecological, cultural, and temporal factors.

The Return of Great Power Rivalry

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Kroenig
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
National Security ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
Global Leadership ◽  
Great Power ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
The Cold War

The United States of America has been the most powerful country in the world for the past seventy years, but will Washington’s reign as the world’s leading superpower continue? The U.S. National Security Strategy declares that the return of great power competition with Russia and China is the greatest threat to U.S. national security and economic well-being. Perhaps surprisingly, international relations scholarship does not have much to say about who wins great power rivalries, and many contemporary analysts argue that America’s autocratic rivals will succeed in disrupting or displacing U.S. global leadership. In sharp contrast, this book makes the novel argument that democracies enjoy built-in advantages in international geopolitics. Drawing on the writings of political philosophers—such as Herodotus, Machiavelli, and Montesquieu—and cutting-edge social science research, this book explains the unique economic, diplomatic, and military advantages that democracies bring to the international arena. It then carefully considers the advantages and disadvantages possessed by autocratic great powers. These ideas are then examined in a series of seven case studies of democratic-versus-autocratic rivalries throughout history, from ancient Greece to the Cold War. The book then unpacks the implications of this analysis for the United States, Russia, and China today. It concludes that, despite its many problems, America’s fundamentals are still much better than Russia’s and China’s. By making the “hard-power” argument for democracy, this book provides an innovative way of thinking about power in international politics and provides an optimistic assessment about the future of American global leadership.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document