Concerns about public misinformation in the United States—ranging from politics to science—are growing. Here, we provide an overview of how and why citizens become (and sometimes remain) misinformed about science. Our discussion focuses specifically on misinformation among individual citizens. However, it is impossible to understand individual information processing and acceptance without taking into account social networks, information ecologies, and other macro-level variables that provide important social context. Specifically, we show how being misinformed is a function of a person’s ability and motivation to spot falsehoods, but also of other group-level and societal factors that increase the chances of citizens to be exposed to correct(ive) information. We conclude by discussing a number of research areas—some of which echo themes of the 2017 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine’s Communicating Science Effectively report—that will be particularly important for our future understanding of misinformation, specifically a systems approach to the problem of misinformation, the need for more systematic analyses of science communication in new media environments, and a (re)focusing on traditionally underserved audiences.
What accounts for the prestige of quantitative methods? The usual answer is that quantification is desirable in social investigation as a result of its successes in science. This book questions whether such success in the study of stars, molecules, or cells should be an attractive model for research on human societies, and examines why the natural sciences are highly quantitative in the first place. The book argues that a better understanding of the attractions of quantification in business, government, and social research brings a fresh perspective to its role in psychology, physics, and medicine. Quantitative rigor is not inherent in science but arises from political and social pressures, and objectivity derives its impetus from cultural contexts. A new preface sheds light on the current infatuation with quantitative methods, particularly at the intersection of science and bureaucracy.
The combination of this new research textbook with Johan Mouton's understanding of Social Research is the solution for research in the caring professions of social sciences. *Please note: This is a reduced version of the abstract. Please refer to PDF for full text.
A historical review of the main authors and their writings that are representative of this particular kind of methodological research in Social Sciences.
Game theory is central to understanding human behavior and relevant to all of the behavioral sciences—from biology and economics, to anthropology and political science. However, as The Bounds of Reason demonstrates, game theory alone cannot fully explain human behavior and should instead complement other key concepts championed by the behavioral disciplines. Herbert Gintis shows that just as game theory without broader social theory is merely technical bravado, so social theory without game theory is a handicapped enterprise. This edition has been thoroughly revised and updated. Reinvigorating game theory, The Bounds of Reason offers innovative thinking for the behavioral sciences.
Antonio Jesus Molina-Fernández, María Gemma Valero-Arroyo, Río Vázquez-Gomis
et al.
Social cinema is a cinematographic expression used to denounce current and historical problems, as well as to identify social limits and promote the transformation of society itself. To this end, works included in social cinema depict aspects of reality to critically influence it. The objective of this study is to examine the evolution of social cinema, as well as its scientific, economic and political bases and its main consequences for the general population. Method: This study was conducted by the application of the technique of qualitative research thematic analysis as a procedure in the process of the execution of the scientific task, related to a historical trend study of the research object. The search was carried out in the databases of IMDB and the Culture Ministry of Spain. The end of the dictatorship and the beginning of democracy (1975) was placed as the historical cutting point in the analysis. Various psychosocial variables were used as categories of analysis, including poverty, work, substance use, crime, urban and rural contexts, violence, etc. Results: Spanish social cinema has evolved since its origins in the 1950s as a reflection of Spanish society. These developments, including both progressions and regressions, have been connected with social, political and economic factors. Conclusions: While the shape of Spanish social cinema has changed over time, its themes have remained similar since the origin: poverty, work and hopelessness. The evolution has not been continuous, as it has fluctuated in response to the claims and requests from the context. The Spanish social cinema has reflected topics and images from Spanish society, even when the sociopolitical context avoided them. Finally, the legitimacy of Spanish social cinema is based on its cultural strength and social/political commitment.
Lisa P. Argyle, Ethan C. Busby, Joshua R. Gubler
et al.
Generative large language models (LLMs) are incredibly useful, versatile, and promising tools. However, they will be of most use to political and social science researchers when they are used in a way that advances understanding about real human behaviors and concerns. To promote the scientific use of LLMs, we suggest that researchers in the political and social sciences need to remain focused on the scientific goal of inference. To this end, we discuss the challenges and opportunities related to scientific inference with LLMs, using validation of model output as an illustrative case for discussion. We propose a set of guidelines related to establishing the failure and success of LLMs when completing particular tasks, and discuss how we can make inferences from these observations. We conclude with a discussion of how this refocus will improve the accumulation of shared scientific knowledge about these tools and their uses in the social sciences.