scholarly journals Comparative Panel File: Household Panel Surveys from Seven Countries. Manual for CPF v.1.0 CPF

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Konrad Turek ◽  
Matthijs Kalmijn ◽  
Thomas Leopold

The Comparative Panel File (CPF) harmonises the world's largest and longest-running household panel surveys from seven countries: Australia (HILDA), Germany (SOEP), Great Britain (BHPS and UKHLS), South Korea (KLIPS), Russia (RLMS), Switzerland (SHP), and the United States (PSID). The project aims to support the social science community in the analysis of comparative life course data. The CPF is not a data product but an open-source code that integrates individual and household panel data from all seven surveys into a harmonised three-level data structure. In this manual, we present the design and content of the CPF, explain the logic of the project, workflow and technical details. We also describe the CPF's open-science platform. More at: www.cpfdata.com

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 826-874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Alba ◽  
Victor Nee

Assimilation theory has been subject to intensive critique for decades. Yet no other framework has provided the social science community with as deep a corpus of cumulative findings concerning the incorporation of immigrants and their descendants. We argue that assimilation theory has not lost its utility for the study of contemporary immigration to the United States. In making our case, we review critically the canonical account of assimilation provided by Milton Gordon and others; we refer to Shibutani and Kwan's theory of ethnic stratification to suggest some directions to take in reformulating assimilation theory. We also examine some of the arguments frequently made to distinguish between the earlier mass immigration of Europeans and the immigration of the contemporary era and find them to be inconclusive. Finally, we sift through some of the evidence about the socioeconomic and residential assimilation of recent immigrant groups. Though the record is clearly mixed, we find evidence consistent with the view that assimilation is taking place, albeit unevenly.


1988 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 149-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nicholson

The Economic and Social Research Council recently published a Report commissioned from a committee chaired by Professor Edwards, a psychiatrist, so that the Council, and the social science community in general, might know what was good and bad in British social sciences, and where the promising future research opportunities lie over the next decade. Boldly called ‘Horizons and Opportunities in the Social Sciences’, the Report condensed the wisdom of social scientists, both British and foreign, and concludes with a broadly but not uncritically favourable picture of the British scene.


Politologija ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 94 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-80
Author(s):  
Lukas Pukelis ◽  
Vilius Stančiauskas

Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) are being increasingly used in various disciplines outside computer science, such as bibliometrics, linguistics, and medicine. However, their uptake in the social science community has been relatively slow, because these highly non-linear models are difficult to interpret and cannot be used for hypothesis testing. Despite the existing limitations, this paper argues that the social science community can benefit from using ANNs in a number of ways, especially by outsourcing laborious data coding and pre-processing tasks to machines in the early stages of analysis. Using ANNs would enable small teams of researchers to process larger quantities of data and undertake more ambitious projects. In fact, the complexity of the pre-processing tasks that ANNs are able to perform mean that researchers could obtain rich and complex data typically associated with qualitative research at a large scale, allowing to combine the best from both qualitative and quantitative approaches.


1981 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 100-122 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna Kumar ◽  
Sripada Raju

AbstractSince the late sixties and seventies, there has been a well articulated concern in Asian countries about the "all pervasive" intellectual influence of Europe and the United States on social sciences in general and sociology in particular (Ashraf 1975; Alatas 1972, 1974; Kothari 1968; Kumar 1978; Goonatilake 1975; Singh 1973). A section of the social science community has suggested that while the diffusion of sociological knowledge-frameworks, paradigms, concepts, theories, methodologies, and substantive findings-from Europe and the United States has undoubtedly laid the foundations of sociology in Asia, it has also contributed to her intellectual dependence in the discipline. As a result of this diffusion process, the parameters of sociological reflection and research in Asia are being largely set by sociologists based in the North American and West European nations. Such a state of affairs, according to this view, stifles the creativity of Asian sociologists and comes in the way of the growth of sociological knowledge relevant to their needs and aspirations. The main purpose of the present paper is to examine with empirical data two questions related to the above concern: first, whether there is any intellectual dependence of sociology in Asia on Western nations, particularly the United States; second, whether this intellectual dependence, if it does exist, is increasing or decreasing over time. Bibliometric reference data from professional journals of six nations have been used to investigate these two questions.


1990 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bjørn Henrichsen

Data from the Central Bureau of Statistics to the Social Science Community: The Norwegian Experience


2000 ◽  
pp. 768-783 ◽  
Author(s):  
Su-Hoon Lee

The once highly lauded ‘East Asian Miracle’ turned sour after some East Asian economies, together with Southeast Asian countries, suffered from currency and ?nancial crisis in 1997. It triggered a great deal of discussion of what both local and foreign analysts called ‘Asian crisis’. It generated numerous questions and issues that troubled not only policy-makers but also the social science community. The discussion continues even today and perhaps will continue forever without any de?nitive conclusion.


Author(s):  
Melissa A Haendel ◽  
Christopher G Chute ◽  
Kenneth Gersing

Abstract Objective COVID-19 poses societal challenges that require expeditious data and knowledge sharing. Though organizational clinical data are abundant, these are largely inaccessible to outside researchers. Statistical, machine learning, and causal analyses are most successful with large-scale data beyond what is available in any given organization. Here, we introduce the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), an open science community focused on analyzing patient-level data from many centers. Methods The Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) Program and scientific community created N3C to overcome technical, regulatory, policy, and governance barriers to sharing and harmonizing individual-level clinical data. We developed solutions to extract, aggregate, and harmonize data across organizations and data models, and created a secure data enclave to enable efficient, transparent, and reproducible collaborative analytics. Organized in inclusive workstreams, in two months we created: legal agreements and governance for organizations and researchers; data extraction scripts to identify and ingest positive, negative, and possible COVID-19 cases; a data quality assurance and harmonization pipeline to create a single harmonized dataset; population of the secure data enclave with data, machine learning, and statistical analytics tools; dissemination mechanisms; and a synthetic data pilot to democratize data access. Discussion The N3C has demonstrated that a multi-site collaborative learning health network can overcome barriers to rapidly build a scalable infrastructure incorporating multi-organizational clinical data for COVID-19 analytics. We expect this effort to save lives by enabling rapid collaboration among clinicians, researchers, and data scientists to identify treatments and specialized care and thereby reduce the immediate and long-term impacts of COVID-19. Lay Summary COVID-19 poses societal challenges that require expeditious data and knowledge sharing. Though medical records are abundant, they are largely inaccessible to outside researchers. Statistical, machine learning, and causal research are most successful with large datasets beyond what is available in any given organization. Here, we introduce the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), an open science community focused on analyzing patient-level data from many clinical centers to reveal patterns in COVID-19 patients. To create N3C, the community had to overcome technical, regulatory, policy, and governance barriers to sharing patient-level clinical data. In less than 2 months, we developed solutions to acquire and harmonize data across organizations and created a secure data environment to enable transparent and reproducible collaborative research. We expect the N3C to help save lives by enabling collaboration among clinicians, researchers, and data scientists to identify treatments and specialized care needs and thereby reduce the immediate and long-term impacts of COVID-19.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srdjan Vucetic

Militarism—a mercurial, endlessly contested concept—is experiencing a renaissance of sorts in many corners of the social science community. In critical security studies, the concept’s purview has become increasingly limited by an abiding theoretical and analytical focus on various practices of securitisation. We argue that there is a need to clarify the logic and stakes of different forms of militarism. Critical security scholars have provided valuable insights into the conditions of ‘exceptionalist militarism.’ However, if we accept that militarism and the production of security are co-constitutive, then we have every reason to consider different manifestations of militarism, their historical trajectories and their inter-relationships. To that end, we draw on the work of historical sociologists and articulate three more ideal types of militarism: nation-state militarism, civil society militarism, and neoliberal militarism. We suggest this typology can more adequately capture key transformations of militarism in the modern period as well as inform further research on the militarism-security nexus.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document