Getting funded. Multi-level network of physicists in Italy

Much of the work in the sociology of science observes scientific communities from a micro perspective, focusing on interactions in laboratories in order to uncover the impact of social and cultural norms in the everyday production of scientific results. Other studies approach the topic from a macro perspective, analysing scientific organizations and the reciprocal influence they have with wider society, or uncovering the invisible colleges that become apparent through the analysis of co-authorship and citations’ patterns. Less attention has been paid to the meso level of interaction within and between scientists and the institutions they work in. This paper extends the structural approach of Lazega et al. (2008. Catching up with big fish in the big pond? Multi-level network analysis through linked design. Social Networks 30, 157–176) and analyses the local system of public funding to physics in Italy using bipartite networks. Data cover 10 years of funding of Projects of National Interest (Prin) from the Italian Ministry of University and Research. The micro level (collaborations between scientists), macro level (collaborations between institutions) and meso level (the combination of network measures at a micro and macro level) of interactions are independently analysed, and results are used to model the total amount of money physicists have received over the 10 years against the variables that meaningfully describe the network structure of collaborations. Results show that in order to be successfully funded what counts more than being a big fish (a scientist with a lot of connections) working in a big pond (a large University), is being in a brokerage position interacting over the years with different research groups.     

Co-constructing controversy: content analysis of collaborative knowledge negotiation in online communities

Knowledge sharing online has flourished within organizations as well as open online communities due to the pervasiveness of Web 2.0 platforms. This paper builds on previous studies of social construction of knowledge online and investigates how contributors in online communities collaboratively share and construct controversial scientific knowledge. As the general public participates in such knowledge collaboration, understanding the processes through which they contribute content and roles that they play is imperative. The authors conducted the content analysis of three online communities that engage in knowledge collaboration on the subject of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccination, which is perceived as contentious knowledge by the public due to the widespread myth among parents that the MMR vaccine is associated with autism. The study's findings include that the content discussed is influenced by the purposes of the communities, nature of the tasks, and demographics of participants, although they discussed the same topic. The authors also found that the framework of knowledge reuse and knowledge co-construction sites is useful for investigating the content and roles that appeared in the three communities. The contribution of the paper includes the analytical framework of knowledge reuse and knowledge co-construction, articulation of the content and roles that appeared in online communities, and unboxing of discourses in three different online communities. Future research directions are also discussed.     

A Bayesian approach for the reliability of scientific co-authorship networks with emphasis on nodes

The co-authorship among members of a research group commonly can be represented by a (co-authorship) graph in which nodes represent the researchers that make up of this group and edges represent the connections between two agents (i.e., the co-authorship between these agents). Current study measures the reliability of networks by taking into consideration unreliable nodes (researchers) and perfectly reliable edges (co-authorship between two researchers). A Bayesian approach for the reliability of a network represented by the co-authorship among members of a real research group is proposed, obtaining Bayesian estimates and credibility intervals for the individual components (nodes or researchers) and the network. Weakly informative and non-informative prior distributions are assumed for those components and the posterior summaries are obtained by Monte Carlo-Markov Chain methods. The results show the relevance of an inferential approach for the reliability of scientific co-authorship network. The results also demonstrate that the contribution of each researcher is highly relevant for the maintenance of a research group. In addition, the Bayesian methodology was a feasible and easy computational implementation.     

The use of different data sources in the analysis of co-authorship networks and scientific performance

Scientific collaboration is usually derived from archival co-authorship data. Several data sources may be examined, but they all have advantages and disadvantages, especially when a specific discipline or community is of interest. The aim of this paper is to explore the effect of the use of three data sources – Web of Science, Current Index to Statistics and nationally funded research projects – on the analysis of co-authorship networks among Italian academic statisticians. Results provide evidence of our hypotheses on distinct collaboration patterns among statisticians, as well as distinct effects of scientist network positions on scientific performance, by both Statistics subfield and data source.     

The Political Economy of Social Science Funding

This article examines recent economic and political trends constraining the production of social science knowledge. Particular attention is given to the Reagan Administration's attempt to contract public sector programs and curtail financial support for social science research. Trends in the private economy, especially within the publishing industry, that affect the production of social science knowledge are also discussed. Over the past few years, the market for social science knowledge has seriously eroded. The erosion of this market is examined within the larger framework of a shift in public policy from legitimation to capital accumulation, a shift that has accompanied right-wing ascendancy in American politics. This shift has created political and economic incentives encouraging the social science community to align more closely with conservatives.     

Using social network analysis to complete literature reviews: a new systematic approach for independent researchers to detect and interpret prominent research programs within large collections of relevant literature

ABSTRACT

Literature reviews are required at early stages of a traditional research progression. Many systematic approaches help researchers identify relevant literature. However, there is far less support for interpreting large collections of references. Understanding the evolution of knowledge within a discipline requires an awareness of the collaborative networks from which significant advances originate. Unfortunately, this relational awareness is only acquired after years of professional experience. Therefore, early-career researchers are at a fundamental disadvantage when conducting literature reviews. Social Network Analysis (SNA) can make the interpretation of large collections of literature more manageable. This paper provides a method for generating a co-authorship network from reference lists. The partition of the co-authorship network into communities provides a reviewer with direction to organise literature into meaningful groups. The interpretation of seemingly disparate and entangled research programs is far more manageable when interpreting smaller collections of highly relevant literature.     

Ecological metaphors as scientific boundary work: innovation and authority in interwar sociology and biology

The development of human ecology during the interwar period was a significant scientific innovation enabled by the sociological use of biological concepts as tropes for social organization. This examination of the connections between biology and sociology illuminates a process whereby new scientific knowledge is generated, new scientific communities are formed, and individuals become scientists. These relationships were arranged around the negotiable boundaries between the social and the natural in 20th-century science. This process is examined through an analysis of scientific texts, metaphor transaction in science, and mentoring practices that reveal the transmission and bounding of knowledge and authority.     

THEORYCRAFTING

This article investigates theorycrafting, a cultural practice of gaming communities, to analyse the differences in participation, knowledge production and dissemination and to show the effect that this has on the community itself. Theorycrafting describes a process of reverse engineering, a process of extracting design ‘blue prints’ to understand a technology better, whose design is not accessible. The ‘design’ not accessible in this case is the game algorithm. The concept of scientification of gameplay is used to highlight the scientific approach of theorycrafters to their gameplay. Their ‘scientific’ approach is described by using Aristotle's concepts episteme, techne and phronesis. His concepts have been chosen as they help us to analyse the different layers of the meaning of ‘theory’ in theorycrafting. This article investigates which understanding of theory and science is central in the practice of theorycrafting. How is a specific concept of science part of mechanisms of participatory surveillance? Theorycrafting can be understood as the desire of players to gain control over the game and share this knowledge with other players. The production of knowledge for the community leads to formulas that are used to improve playing skills, but through the spread of add-ons and forms of social control, it can also be described as a tool for surveillance.     

Connecting the dots: implementing and evaluating a network intervention to foster scientific collaboration and productivity

This article presents the design and implementation of a network intervention to foster scientific collaboration at a research university, and describes an experimental framework for rigorous evaluation of the intervention’s impact. Based on social network analysis of publication and grant data, an innovative type of research funding program was developed as a form of alteration of the university’s collaboration network. The intervention consisted in identifying research communities in the network and creating a new collaborative relation between pairs of unconnected researchers in selected communities. The new collaboration was created to maximally increase the overall cohesion of the target research community. In order to evaluate the impact of the program, we designed a randomized experiment with treatment and control communities based on the Rubin Causal Model approach. The paper describes the intervention design, reports findings from the program implementation, and discusses the statistical framework for future evaluation of the intervention.     

Social-ecological science in the humane metropolis

The Humane metropolis is a rubric to summarize and promote environmental and social quality in contemporary urban mosaics. Because cities, suburbs, and exurbs, as spatially extensive and connected socio-ecological systems, exhibit many negative features, the humane metropolis identifies a strategy to combat the ills and instill more positive and sustainable features and processes in urban systems. Because the humane metropolis as a program has arisen primarily from social motivations, there is the opportunity to articulate more explicitly the role that science can play in addressing the humane metropolis program and evaluating its success. A humane metropolis can be summarized as one that 1) protects and restores ecological services in cities and suburbs, 2) promotes physical and mental health and safety of residents, 3) enhances efficiency by conserving energy, matter, water, and time, 4) facilitates equity by being inclusive, as well as socially and environmentally just, and 5) maintains a sense of community and a sense of place. We clarify the nature of science as a contributor to the social program, pointing out the social values motivating science, and the role that scientific knowledge and metaphor play in linking science with the social program of the humane metropolis. We further identify roles that socio-ecological research can play in meeting the goals of the humane metropolis. We use examples of environmental history, watershed function and restoration, and environmental justice research and action from the Baltimore Ecosystem Study, Long-Term Ecological Research program. The humane metropolis as a social program benefits from scientific contributions that 1) expose hidden ecological processes in urban systems, 2) generate knowledge connecting people and institutions to the biophysical environment, 3) contribute to the civic dialog, and 4) bring scientific values to the prioritization and balancing of the goals of the humane metropolis.     

The Social Aspects of Xenotransplantation

Xenotransplantation is a controversial medical science where living animal parts are transplanted into humans. While the literature on xenotransplantation is vast in regards to medical and scientific research, and ethics, it is comparatively lacking in social science. This article examines the literature on the social aspects of xenotransplantation, with a focus on public perception, ontology and identity, meat, knowledge production, animal bodies and scientific knowledge. This demonstrates that the science seeks to stabilise the understandings and social perceptions of xenotransplantation by using natural and cultural arguments, but the public exhibit significant uncertainty and ambiguity. The article concludes by suggesting future directions for the social research on xenotransplantation.     

Rethinking Activism and Expertise within Environmental Health Conflicts

This review presents the contributions of research on the intersection of science and social movements, its theoretical and methodological limitations, and potential solutions for its further development. Three different types of relationships between activism and knowledge have been identified within environmental health conflicts: (i) lay – activists requesting help from sympathetic scientists in order to conduct independent studies; (ii) expert – activists promoting new research agendas and sub‐fields within established scientific disciplines; and (iii) expert – activists acting beyond the limits of the academic community and partnering with social movements. In this review, I argue that much of the existing literature considers expertise as “something” possessed by individuals, and heavily emphasizes the difference between “lay” and “expert” activists. This entails two main theoretical reductionisms: (i) reification of knowledge; and (ii) overlooking the contribution of activism to expertise and vice versa. I propose considering expertise as the property of a network and focusing future research within environmental health conflicts on the co‐emergence and construction of a network of expertise (Eyal 2013) or ethno‐epistemic assemblage (Irwin & Michael 2003) and social movements. Through this symmetrical network approach, we will be able to develop a more consistent theory of the co‐production of activism and expertise, as well as its political implication to fight environmental health injustice.     

Fat in the Fire? Science,the News Media,and the “Obesity Epidemic”2

In recent years, the “obesity epidemic” has emerged as a putative public health crisis. This article examines the interconnected role of medical science and news reporting in shaping the way obesity is framed as a social problem. Drawing on a sample of scientific publications on weight and health, and press releases and news reporting on these publications, we compare and contrast social problem frames in medical science and news reporting. We find substantial overlap in science and news reporting, but the news media do dramatize more than the studies on which they are reporting and are more likely than the original science to highlight individual blame for weight. This is partly due to the news media’s tendency to report more heavily on the most alarmist and individual‐blaming scientific studies. We find some evidence that press releases also shape which articles receive media coverage and how they are framed.     

Sources,Characteristics and Effects of Mass Media Communication on Science: A Review of the Literature,Current Trends and Areas for Future Research

A significant amount of science coverage can be found nowadays in the mass media and is the main source of information about science for many. Accordingly, the relation between science and the media has been intensively analyzed within the social scientific community. It is difficult to keep track of this research, however, as a flurry of studies has been published on the issue. This article provides such an overview. First, it lays out the main theoretical models of science communication, that is, the ‘public understanding of science’ and the ‘mediatization’ model. Second, it describes existing empirical research. In this section, it demonstrates how science’s agenda‐building has improved, how science journalists working routines are described, how different scientific disciplines are presented in the mass media and what effects these media representations (might) have on the audience. Third, the article points out future fields of research.     

The Flexibility of Scientific Rhetoric: A Case Study of UFO Researchers

The case of ufology demonstrates that cultural packaging—a sort of once-removed indication of scientific authority—can be key in creating knowledge accepted as scientific. This adds a new dimension to the argument that scientific legitimacy is constructed, not just from scientific methodologies and institutional location, but also of language, culture, rhetoric, and symbols. Fringe researchers can make their cases for legitimacy using a variety of strategies—few of which involve actual research. Outside of the scientific community, scientific-sounding explanations and proclamations of expert statuses hold sway. Ambiguities about what constitutes science can be capitalized upon by groups like the UFO research community that assembles shards of legitimacy using science as a cultural template.     

Editorial

Abstract

The last century has been significant in terms of the development of the social sciences. Thus for instance, sociology, social psychology, politics, education and management have all taken their own pathways to reach some level of maturity. The relatively new addition to this group is, of course, management and its associated organisational theory that arose with Taylor at the turn of the nineteenth century. He pioneered the scientific movement and argued that management should be based on well-recognised, clearly defined and fixed principles, instead of depending on more or less hazy ideas. However, it seems that a management science has only in recent decades become substantive and rich enough to be able to think in the same terms as other branches of the social sciences. It has been enriched by the other social sciences through a process that I refer to as knowledge migration, a process in which knowledge that applies to one scientific area is migrated across to another in a way that validly transforms it to its new context. Thus, knowledge that takes a particular meaning in one of these sciences may end up with a quite different, though thematically related, meaning in another. Whenever a concept is shifted in a valid way from one paradigm that underpins a particular theory in one area of social science to another, the knowledge is migrated rather than transferred.     

Protecting ecosystems: network structure and social capital mobilization

The research reported here explores a community that amassedsocial capital in effective and diverse ways, enabling it tofight a corporate giant and protect critical, large watersheds.We explore how the dynamic interaction between network formationand network structure augmented community social capital, particularlybridging, for increased access to human and economic capital.Network structure(s) can create enabling conditions for themobilization of social capital within communities and for peopleto feel empowered to act. The research suggests that there isan opportunity for policy-makers to learn what kinds of policiescan enhance or destroy existing social capital in a community.     

Social and semantic coevolution in knowledge networks

Socio-semantic networks involve agents creating and processing information: communities of scientists, software developers, wiki contributors and webloggers are, among others, examples of such knowledge networks. We aim at demonstrating that the dynamics of these communities can be adequately described as the coevolution of a social and a socio-semantic network. More precisely, we will first introduce a theoretical framework based on a social network and a socio-semantic network, i.e. an epistemic network featuring agents, concepts and links between agents and between agents and concepts. Adopting a relevant empirical protocol, we will then describe the joint dynamics of social and socio-semantic structures, at both macroscopic and microscopic scales, emphasizing the remarkable stability of these macroscopic properties in spite of a vivid local, agent-based network dynamics.     

Diversification and internationalization in the sociological study of science and religion

Classical sociology addressed the relationship between science and religion, but interest in the topic waned during the 20th century. A second wave of research has emerged in the 21st century, focusing on scientists' (ir)religiosity, evolution, and the relationship between knowledge and acceptance of scientific concepts. Most of this research has been conducted in the United States, used quantitative methods, and focused on creationism, although scholars have recently begun to explore different research methods and sites. Their results suggest that the “conflict thesis” is not valid and that publics and scientists' views tend to be fluid and strongly shaped by national context. The literature on nonreligion has also expanded, but its connection to science remains ripe for further development. A more intersectional approach would also benefit the field, as would increased engagement between public understanding of science scholars and sociologists studying science and religion. Research in both areas is showing that attitudes toward science and religion cannot be understood solely in terms of knowledge about either domain. There is scope for more empirical and theoretical work internationally eschewing the assumption that science and religion conflict and focusing more on identity, culture, and power relations.