How social science got better: overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection
"Social science research is facing mounting criticism, as canonical studies fail to replicate, questionable research practices abound, and researcher social and political biases come under fire. Far from crisis, however, social science is undergoing an unparalleled renaissance of ever-broader a...
Gespeichert in:
1. Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Format: | Buch |
Sprache: | English |
Veröffentlicht: |
New York, NY
Oxford University Press
[2021]
|
Schlagworte: | |
Zusammenfassung: | "Social science research is facing mounting criticism, as canonical studies fail to replicate, questionable research practices abound, and researcher social and political biases come under fire. Far from crisis, however, social science is undergoing an unparalleled renaissance of ever-broader and deeper understanding and application-made possible by close attention to criticism of our biases and open public engagement. Wars between scientists and their humanist critics, methodological disputes over statistical practice and qualitative research, and disciplinary battles over grand theories of human nature have all quietly died down as new generations of scholars have integrated the insights of multiple sides. Rather than deny that researcher biases affect results, scholars now closely analyze how our racial, gender, geographic, methodological, political, and ideological differences impact our research questions, how the incentives of academia influence our research practices, and how universal human desires to avoid uncomfortable truths and easily solve problems affect our conclusions. To be sure, misaligned incentive structures remain, but a messy, collective deliberation across the research community is boosting self-knowledge and improving practice. Ours is an unprecedented age of theoretical diversity, open and connected data, and public scholarship. How Social Science Got Better documents and explains recent transformations, crediting both internal and public critics for strengthening social science. Applying insights from the philosophy, history, and sociology of science and providing new data on trends in social science research and scholarly views, it demonstrates that social science has never been more relevant, rigorous, or self-reflective"-- |
Beschreibung: | xxiv, 316 Seiten Illustrationen 25 cm |
ISBN: | 9780197518977 |
Internformat
MARC
LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 c 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | BV047920116 | ||
003 | DE-604 | ||
005 | 20220829 | ||
007 | t | ||
008 | 220410s2021 a||| b||| 00||| eng d | ||
020 | |a 9780197518977 |9 978-0-19-751897-7 | ||
035 | |a (OCoLC)1319624731 | ||
035 | |a (DE-599)BVBBV047920116 | ||
040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rda | ||
041 | 0 | |a eng | |
049 | |a DE-12 | ||
084 | |a MR 2000 |0 (DE-625)123487: |2 rvk | ||
100 | 1 | |a Grossmann, Matthew |d 1979- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)1023980312 |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a How social science got better |b overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection |c Matt Grossmann |
264 | 1 | |a New York, NY |b Oxford University Press |c [2021] | |
264 | 4 | |c © 2021 | |
300 | |a xxiv, 316 Seiten |b Illustrationen |c 25 cm | ||
336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
505 | 8 | |a Social science biases and collective knowledge -- Reform and progress -- The quiet resolution of the science wars -- Me-search all the way down -- American academia: the main setting for social science -- Opportunities and constraints of the disciplines -- Multiple levels of analysis and time scales -- All history and policy -- Motivations and constraints of a practical orientation -- popularization and consilience | |
520 | 3 | |a "Social science research is facing mounting criticism, as canonical studies fail to replicate, questionable research practices abound, and researcher social and political biases come under fire. Far from crisis, however, social science is undergoing an unparalleled renaissance of ever-broader and deeper understanding and application-made possible by close attention to criticism of our biases and open public engagement. Wars between scientists and their humanist critics, methodological disputes over statistical practice and qualitative research, and disciplinary battles over grand theories of human nature have all quietly died down as new generations of scholars have integrated the insights of multiple sides. Rather than deny that researcher biases affect results, scholars now closely analyze how our racial, gender, geographic, methodological, political, and ideological differences impact our research questions, how the incentives of academia influence our research practices, and how universal human desires to avoid uncomfortable truths and easily solve problems affect our conclusions. To be sure, misaligned incentive structures remain, but a messy, collective deliberation across the research community is boosting self-knowledge and improving practice. Ours is an unprecedented age of theoretical diversity, open and connected data, and public scholarship. How Social Science Got Better documents and explains recent transformations, crediting both internal and public critics for strengthening social science. Applying insights from the philosophy, history, and sociology of science and providing new data on trends in social science research and scholarly views, it demonstrates that social science has never been more relevant, rigorous, or self-reflective"-- | |
650 | 0 | 7 | |a Methode |0 (DE-588)4038971-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
650 | 0 | 7 | |a Sozialwissenschaften |0 (DE-588)4055916-6 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
650 | 0 | 7 | |a Theorie |0 (DE-588)4059787-8 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
650 | 0 | 7 | |a Vorurteil |0 (DE-588)4064037-1 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
650 | 0 | 7 | |a Selbstverständnis |0 (DE-588)4054438-2 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
653 | 0 | |a Social sciences / Research | |
653 | 0 | |a Social sciences / Methodology | |
653 | 0 | |a Sciences sociales / Recherche | |
653 | 0 | |a SOCIAL SCIENCE / General | |
653 | 0 | |a Social sciences / Methodology | |
653 | 0 | |a Social sciences / Research | |
689 | 0 | 0 | |a Sozialwissenschaften |0 (DE-588)4055916-6 |D s |
689 | 0 | 1 | |a Selbstverständnis |0 (DE-588)4054438-2 |D s |
689 | 0 | 2 | |a Vorurteil |0 (DE-588)4064037-1 |D s |
689 | 0 | 3 | |a Methode |0 (DE-588)4038971-6 |D s |
689 | 0 | 4 | |a Theorie |0 (DE-588)4059787-8 |D s |
689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
776 | 0 | 8 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Online-Ausgabe |z 978-0-19-751899-1 |
999 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033301719 |
Datensatz im Suchindex
_version_ | 1804183544602296320 |
---|---|
adam_txt | |
any_adam_object | |
any_adam_object_boolean | |
author | Grossmann, Matthew 1979- |
author_GND | (DE-588)1023980312 |
author_facet | Grossmann, Matthew 1979- |
author_role | aut |
author_sort | Grossmann, Matthew 1979- |
author_variant | m g mg |
building | Verbundindex |
bvnumber | BV047920116 |
classification_rvk | MR 2000 |
contents | Social science biases and collective knowledge -- Reform and progress -- The quiet resolution of the science wars -- Me-search all the way down -- American academia: the main setting for social science -- Opportunities and constraints of the disciplines -- Multiple levels of analysis and time scales -- All history and policy -- Motivations and constraints of a practical orientation -- popularization and consilience |
ctrlnum | (OCoLC)1319624731 (DE-599)BVBBV047920116 |
discipline | Soziologie |
discipline_str_mv | Soziologie |
format | Book |
fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>04065nam a2200517 c 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV047920116</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20220829 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220410s2021 a||| b||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9780197518977</subfield><subfield code="9">978-0-19-751897-7</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)1319624731</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)BVBBV047920116</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">MR 2000</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)123487:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Grossmann, Matthew</subfield><subfield code="d">1979-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)1023980312</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">How social science got better</subfield><subfield code="b">overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection</subfield><subfield code="c">Matt Grossmann</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">New York, NY</subfield><subfield code="b">Oxford University Press</subfield><subfield code="c">[2021]</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="c">© 2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">xxiv, 316 Seiten</subfield><subfield code="b">Illustrationen</subfield><subfield code="c">25 cm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="505" ind1="8" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Social science biases and collective knowledge -- Reform and progress -- The quiet resolution of the science wars -- Me-search all the way down -- American academia: the main setting for social science -- Opportunities and constraints of the disciplines -- Multiple levels of analysis and time scales -- All history and policy -- Motivations and constraints of a practical orientation -- popularization and consilience</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">"Social science research is facing mounting criticism, as canonical studies fail to replicate, questionable research practices abound, and researcher social and political biases come under fire. Far from crisis, however, social science is undergoing an unparalleled renaissance of ever-broader and deeper understanding and application-made possible by close attention to criticism of our biases and open public engagement. Wars between scientists and their humanist critics, methodological disputes over statistical practice and qualitative research, and disciplinary battles over grand theories of human nature have all quietly died down as new generations of scholars have integrated the insights of multiple sides. Rather than deny that researcher biases affect results, scholars now closely analyze how our racial, gender, geographic, methodological, political, and ideological differences impact our research questions, how the incentives of academia influence our research practices, and how universal human desires to avoid uncomfortable truths and easily solve problems affect our conclusions. To be sure, misaligned incentive structures remain, but a messy, collective deliberation across the research community is boosting self-knowledge and improving practice. Ours is an unprecedented age of theoretical diversity, open and connected data, and public scholarship. How Social Science Got Better documents and explains recent transformations, crediting both internal and public critics for strengthening social science. Applying insights from the philosophy, history, and sociology of science and providing new data on trends in social science research and scholarly views, it demonstrates that social science has never been more relevant, rigorous, or self-reflective"--</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Methode</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4038971-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Sozialwissenschaften</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4055916-6</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Theorie</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4059787-8</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Vorurteil</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4064037-1</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Selbstverständnis</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4054438-2</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social sciences / Research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social sciences / Methodology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Sciences sociales / Recherche</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">SOCIAL SCIENCE / General</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social sciences / Methodology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Social sciences / Research</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Sozialwissenschaften</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4055916-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Selbstverständnis</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4054438-2</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">Vorurteil</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4064037-1</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="3"><subfield code="a">Methode</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4038971-6</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Theorie</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4059787-8</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="776" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Erscheint auch als</subfield><subfield code="n">Online-Ausgabe</subfield><subfield code="z">978-0-19-751899-1</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="999" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033301719</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
id | DE-604.BV047920116 |
illustrated | Illustrated |
index_date | 2024-07-03T19:33:30Z |
indexdate | 2024-07-10T09:25:08Z |
institution | BVB |
isbn | 9780197518977 |
language | English |
oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-033301719 |
oclc_num | 1319624731 |
open_access_boolean | |
owner | DE-12 |
owner_facet | DE-12 |
physical | xxiv, 316 Seiten Illustrationen 25 cm |
publishDate | 2021 |
publishDateSearch | 2021 |
publishDateSort | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | marc |
spelling | Grossmann, Matthew 1979- Verfasser (DE-588)1023980312 aut How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection Matt Grossmann New York, NY Oxford University Press [2021] © 2021 xxiv, 316 Seiten Illustrationen 25 cm txt rdacontent n rdamedia nc rdacarrier Social science biases and collective knowledge -- Reform and progress -- The quiet resolution of the science wars -- Me-search all the way down -- American academia: the main setting for social science -- Opportunities and constraints of the disciplines -- Multiple levels of analysis and time scales -- All history and policy -- Motivations and constraints of a practical orientation -- popularization and consilience "Social science research is facing mounting criticism, as canonical studies fail to replicate, questionable research practices abound, and researcher social and political biases come under fire. Far from crisis, however, social science is undergoing an unparalleled renaissance of ever-broader and deeper understanding and application-made possible by close attention to criticism of our biases and open public engagement. Wars between scientists and their humanist critics, methodological disputes over statistical practice and qualitative research, and disciplinary battles over grand theories of human nature have all quietly died down as new generations of scholars have integrated the insights of multiple sides. Rather than deny that researcher biases affect results, scholars now closely analyze how our racial, gender, geographic, methodological, political, and ideological differences impact our research questions, how the incentives of academia influence our research practices, and how universal human desires to avoid uncomfortable truths and easily solve problems affect our conclusions. To be sure, misaligned incentive structures remain, but a messy, collective deliberation across the research community is boosting self-knowledge and improving practice. Ours is an unprecedented age of theoretical diversity, open and connected data, and public scholarship. How Social Science Got Better documents and explains recent transformations, crediting both internal and public critics for strengthening social science. Applying insights from the philosophy, history, and sociology of science and providing new data on trends in social science research and scholarly views, it demonstrates that social science has never been more relevant, rigorous, or self-reflective"-- Methode (DE-588)4038971-6 gnd rswk-swf Sozialwissenschaften (DE-588)4055916-6 gnd rswk-swf Theorie (DE-588)4059787-8 gnd rswk-swf Vorurteil (DE-588)4064037-1 gnd rswk-swf Selbstverständnis (DE-588)4054438-2 gnd rswk-swf Social sciences / Research Social sciences / Methodology Sciences sociales / Recherche SOCIAL SCIENCE / General Sozialwissenschaften (DE-588)4055916-6 s Selbstverständnis (DE-588)4054438-2 s Vorurteil (DE-588)4064037-1 s Methode (DE-588)4038971-6 s Theorie (DE-588)4059787-8 s DE-604 Erscheint auch als Online-Ausgabe 978-0-19-751899-1 |
spellingShingle | Grossmann, Matthew 1979- How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection Social science biases and collective knowledge -- Reform and progress -- The quiet resolution of the science wars -- Me-search all the way down -- American academia: the main setting for social science -- Opportunities and constraints of the disciplines -- Multiple levels of analysis and time scales -- All history and policy -- Motivations and constraints of a practical orientation -- popularization and consilience Methode (DE-588)4038971-6 gnd Sozialwissenschaften (DE-588)4055916-6 gnd Theorie (DE-588)4059787-8 gnd Vorurteil (DE-588)4064037-1 gnd Selbstverständnis (DE-588)4054438-2 gnd |
subject_GND | (DE-588)4038971-6 (DE-588)4055916-6 (DE-588)4059787-8 (DE-588)4064037-1 (DE-588)4054438-2 |
title | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection |
title_auth | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection |
title_exact_search | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection |
title_exact_search_txtP | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection |
title_full | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection Matt Grossmann |
title_fullStr | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection Matt Grossmann |
title_full_unstemmed | How social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection Matt Grossmann |
title_short | How social science got better |
title_sort | how social science got better overcoming bias with more evidence diversity and self reflection |
title_sub | overcoming bias with more evidence, diversity, and self-reflection |
topic | Methode (DE-588)4038971-6 gnd Sozialwissenschaften (DE-588)4055916-6 gnd Theorie (DE-588)4059787-8 gnd Vorurteil (DE-588)4064037-1 gnd Selbstverständnis (DE-588)4054438-2 gnd |
topic_facet | Methode Sozialwissenschaften Theorie Vorurteil Selbstverständnis |
work_keys_str_mv | AT grossmannmatthew howsocialsciencegotbetterovercomingbiaswithmoreevidencediversityandselfreflection |