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 ...

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.

scholarly journals The Inference Engine: A Grand Challenge to Address the Context Sensitivity Problem in Social Science Research

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel L. Goroff ◽  
Neil Anthony Lewis ◽  
Anne M. Scheel ◽  
Laura Danielle Scherer ◽  
Joshua A Tucker
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Inference Engine ◽  
Context Sensitivity ◽  
Grand Challenge ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The People ◽  
Working Together ◽  
Sensitivity Problem

Social science has a ‘context sensitivity’ problem: the people that we study, and the situations they engage in, are so complex and variable that predicting how they will think, feel, and behave in a given situation is very challenging. Even when we are able to make such predictions, it is often unclear how accurate they will be if some feature of the studied subjects and/or situation changes. This limits the utility of our research for application and policy, as the ‘contextual factors’ that might change our conclusions are often unknown. It is time to address this context sensitivity problem in social science research. While do not yet know how to solve it, we believe social scientists can make great progress by working together to build an inference engine.

Conference on Social Science Research in Liberia

1970 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-138
Author(s):  
L. P. Hartzler
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
West African ◽  
Turn Of The Century ◽  
African Studies ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The West

This two-day conference, sponsored by Stanford's Committee on African Studies, was possibly the first gathering of its kind outside Liberia since the American Colonisation Society ceased sending emigrants to the West African Republic at the turn of the century. It was organised by Dr Martin Lowenkopf, and was attended by over 40 social scientists, including six Liberians at present studying in the United States.

Three Questions for Historians of Science in the Modern Middle East and North Africa

2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 588-591 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyrus Schayegh
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Social Science ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Rockefeller Foundation ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Biomedical Sciences ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Subsequent Work ◽  
Societal Relevance

What was science, who was involved in it, and where did it unfold in the modern Middle East and North Africa? These are the three questions raised in this piece. The following notes echo my past research on the growth and societal relevance of biomedical sciences in Iran, and are also informed by a new interest in social sciences and, more particularly, in the establishment in 1927 of the Social Science Research Section at the American University of Beirut (AUB; called Syrian Protestant College until 1920) and its subsequent work. A handful of social scientists led by the American Stuart Dodd and financed by the US Rockefeller Foundation, which was active worldwide, helped turn AUB into a hub not only of education, but more than before, of research too. Covering wide swathes of the “Near East,” these social scientists framed that region as an extraordinary “laboratory” for social science research.

scholarly journals Gatekeepers in Agricultural Extension Research: A Retrospective Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 94-110
Author(s):  
Fallys Masambuka-Kanchewa ◽  
Kevan Lamm ◽  
Alexa Lamm
Keyword(s):  
Rural Communities ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Research Subjects ◽  
Social Scientists

Social science research plays an important role in transforming agriculture as it provides an invaluable source of information for policy formulation and implementation. Social scientists collecting data in rural communities, where the majority of agricultural production occurs, around the globe frequently pass through a layer of gatekeepers to access research communities and subjects. Gatekeepers serve a critical role in access to subjects but their influence on the research process in many countries and contexts has not been examined thoroughly. The findings of this phenomenology study, conducted in four Sub-Saharan Africa countries, indicated gatekeepers provide invaluable access to individuals and perspectives that may otherwise be inaccessible. However, the findings indicated gatekeepers may also have a vested interests in the research being conducted. Among others, gatekeepers may introduce selection bias to the research process. Therefore, it is important for social scientists working in countries where gatekeepers are involved in the research process to understand the limitations gatekeepers introduce when conducting social science research. Having such knowledge is necessary when interpreting research results and will help researchers be cognizant of the power dynamics that may exist between gatekeepers and those they represent as well as implications on the research process. Keywords: Gatekeepers, social science research, objectivity, power structures, extension, access, research subjects

scholarly journals Contextualizing Social Science in Nepal

1970 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Dev Raj Dahal
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Linear Structure ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Practical Experience ◽  
Contextual Knowledge ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The One

Social science informs about the ideals and trains experts to deal with the complex social realities. It has a public purpose rooted in what we call dharma (professional and institutional responsibility) as opposed to the arrogance of reason, self-will and self-rationalization intrinsic to contemporary rational choice and modernity. Learning has a synergy - establishing connection between the world of social science theories and the drama of social life. A lack of mutual learning between Nepal's traditional faith intellectuals and modern reason-based social scientists has created a big hiatus and contradiction. The academic life of social scientists in Nepal is completely outside of spiritual, moral and ethical influence experienced by ordinary public. The spiritual blindness of modern social scientists has thus opened multiple gaps between their worldview and those of the citizens on various frontiers--theoretical knowledge and practical experience, technical understanding and composite knowledge and secularity of social science and the vitality of the Hindu-Buddhist scriptures in the popular mind, culture, behavior and practices. This has reinforced a division between the system of knowledge of social scientists and the life-world of people. The proponents of new social movements in Nepal, such as women, Dalits, Janajatis, Madhesis, youths and marginalized population are seeking a structural shift in reason-based knowledge to both reason and feeling in social science knowledge discovery. This movement can open the "captive mind" to social learning of contextual knowledge, conduct research with the citizens, provide inputs to the policy makers and reverse their linear, structure-bound, rationalist and disciplinary thinking into the one that represents what the Nepal mandala, the Nepali space, is really like and how to improve it for the better. The renewal and indigenization of qualitative social science research is important to overcome the spirited challenges posed by social forces in Nepal and contribute to the application of scientific reasoning in public policy and social change.Key Words: social movement, NepalDOI = 10.3126/dsaj.v2i0.1356Dhaulagiri Journal of Sociology and Anthropology Vol.2 pp.1-30

Social Policy, Power, and Social Science Research

1973 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth Clark
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Constitution ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Equal Protection Clause ◽  
Public Policy Decisions

In its historic decision of May 17, 1954 (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka),the United States Supreme Court ruled that state laws which required or permitted racial segregation in public education violated the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution. In concluding that "Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal," the Court cited the work of social scientists in its pioneering and controversial footnote eleven. This citation demonstrated dramatically that the theories and research findings of social scientists could influence public policy decisions on educational and other social problems. The use of social science research in the making of such important policy decisions raised the question among social scientists of the propriety of their involvement or the validity of their contribution to the decisions.

scholarly journals Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM): Why and How to Connect Researchers and Practitioners

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 265-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Seth Levine
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Organizational Diversity ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Impact ◽  
New Evidence

ABSTRACTResearchers and practitioners increasingly want to learn from one another and work together to solve problems. This article presents results from a new evidence-based approach for connecting them, called Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM). This method leverages research on organizational diversity to initiate new relationships between diverse people. The article describes the method and presents data from 37 new connections between practitioners working at nonprofits and social scientists. To my knowledge, this is the first dataset describing reasons why a large variety of nonprofit practitioners value social science research. I also document the impact of these matches. Overall, this article provides actionable guidance for those who want to initiate their own new connections (i.e., match themselves) and/or to broker new connections between others.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document