A Philosophical Treatise on the Connection of Scientific Reasoning

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Philosophical Treatise on the Connection of Scientific Reasoning mathematics Review A Philosophical Treatise on the Connection of Scientific Reasoning with Fuzzy Logic Evangelos Athanassopoulos 1 and Michael Gr. Voskoglou 2,* 1 Independent Researcher, Giannakopoulou 39, 27300 Gastouni, Greece; [email protected] 2 Department of Applied Mathematics, Graduate Technological Educational Institute of Western Greece, 22334 Patras, Greece * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 4 May 2020; Accepted: 19 May 2020; Published:1 June 2020 Abstract: The present article studies the connection of scientific reasoning with fuzzy logic. Induction and deduction are the two main types of human reasoning. Although deduction is the basis of the scientific method, almost all the scientific progress (with pure mathematics being probably the unique exception) has its roots to inductive reasoning. Fuzzy logic gives to the disdainful by the classical/bivalent logic induction its proper place and importance as a fundamental component of the scientific reasoning. The error of induction is transferred to deductive reasoning through its premises. Consequently, although deduction is always a valid process, it is not an infallible method. Thus, there is a need of quantifying the degree of truth not only of the inductive, but also of the deductive arguments. In the former case, probability and statistics and of course fuzzy logic in cases of imprecision are the tools available for this purpose. In the latter case, the Bayesian probabilities play a dominant role. As many specialists argue nowadays, the whole science could be viewed as a Bayesian process. A timely example, concerning the validity of the viruses’ tests, is presented, illustrating the importance of the Bayesian processes for scientific reasoning. Keywords: inductive and deductive reasoning; fuzzy logic (FL); scientific method; probability and statistics; Bayesian probabilities “Doubt is not a pleasant situation, but the excessive certainty is an unreasonable situation” Voltaire (1694–1778) 1. Introduction It is hard to deny that the rapid and impressive advances of the last 100–150 years in science and technology have been greatly based on the principles of the bivalent logic of Aristotle, which has played (and plays) a dominant role for more than 23 centuries for the progress of the Western civilization. On the contrary, ideas of multi-valued logics were traditionally connected to the culture and customs of the Eastern countries of Asia, being inherent in the philosophy of Buddha Siddhartha Gautama, who lived in India during the fifth century BC. Nevertheless, the formalization of those logics was performed in the West with the Zadeh’s Fuzzy Logic (FL), an infinite-valued logic based on the mathematical theory of fuzzy set (FS) [1]. The instantaneous switch from truth (1) to falsity (0) can easily distinguish propositions of classical logic from those in FL with values lying in the interval [0, 1]. As it usually happens in science with such radical ideas, FL, when first introduced during the 1970s, was confronted with distrust and reserve by most mathematicians and other positive scientists. However, it has been eventually proved to be an effective generalization and complement of the classical logic and has found many and important applications to almost all sectors of human activity, e.g., [2]: Chapters 4–8, [3], etc. Mathematics 2020, 8, 875; doi:10.3390/math8060875 www.mdpi.com/journal/mathematics Mathematics 2020, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 16 Mathematicsand complement2020, 8, 875 of the classical logic and has found many and important applications to almost all2 of 15 sectors of human activity, e.g., [2]: Chapters 4–8, [3], etc. Human reasoning is characterized by inaccuracies and uncertainties, which stem from the Human reasoning is characterized by inaccuracies and uncertainties, which stem from the nature nature of humans and the world. In fact, none of our senses and observation instruments allows us of humans and the world. In fact, none of our senses and observation instruments allows us to reach to reach an absolute precision in a world which is based on the principle of continuity, as opposed to an absolute precision in a world which is based on the principle of continuity, as opposed to discrete discrete values. Consequently, FL, introducing the concept of membership degree that allows a values.condition Consequently, to be in a state FL, other introducing than true the or conceptfalse, provides of membership a flexibility degree to formalize that allows human a reasoning. condition to beAnother in a state advantage other than of trueFL is or that false, rules provides are set ain flexibility natural language to formalize with the human help reasoning.of linguistic, Another and advantagetherefore offuzzy, FL is variables. that rules In are this set way, in natural the po languagetential ofwith FL becomes the help strong of linguistic, enough and to enable therefore fuzzy,developing variables. a model In this of way, human the potentialreasoning ofproceeding FL becomes in natural strong enoughlanguage. to Furthermore, enable developing since at a modelthe of humanbasis of reasoning in proceeding expert systems in natural are human language. notions Furthermore, and concepts, sincethe success at the of basis these of systems reasoning in expertdepends systems upon the are correspondence human notions between and concepts, human the reasoning success and of these their systems formalization. depends Thus, upon FL the correspondenceappears as a powerful between theoretical human reasoning framework and for their studying formalization. not only human Thus, FLreasoning, appears but as aalso powerful the theoreticalstructure framework of expert systems. for studying not only human reasoning, but also the structure of expert systems. However,However, only only a a limited limited number number ofof reportsreports appear in in the the literature literature connecting connecting FL FLto tohuman human reasoning;reasoning; e.g., e.g., see [see4–6 [4–6].]. This This was ourwas mainour motivationmain motivation for performing for performing the present the present study by study continuing by ourcontinuing previousanalogous our previous efforts. analogous In fact, efforts. in a recent In fact book, in writtena recent in book the Greekwritten language, in the Greek the first language, author of thisthe article first studiesauthor of the this inductive article studies reasoning the inductiv under thee reasoning light of FL under and criticizesthe light of the FL excessive and criticizes accusations the excessive accusations of the Philosophy of Science against it [7]. Additionally, in an earlier work [8], of the Philosophy of Science against it [7]. Additionally, in an earlier work [8], the second author has the second author has introduced a model for analyzing human reasoning by representing its steps introduced a model for analyzing human reasoning by representing its steps as fuzzy sets on a set of as fuzzy sets on a set of linguistic labels characterizing the individual’s performance in each of those linguistic labels characterizing the individual’s performance in each of those steps. steps. TheThe target target of of the the article article at at hand hand isis toto analyzeanalyze the scientific scientific method method of of reasoning reasoning under under the the light light of FL.of FL. The The rest rest of of the the article article is is organized organized asas follows:follows: Section 2 examines the the inductive inductive and and deductive deductive reasoningreasoning from from the the scope scope of FL.of SectionFL. Section3 explains 3 expl howains thesehow these two fundamentaltwo fundamental components components of human of reasoninghuman reasoning act together act fortogether creating, for creating, improving improv anding expanding and expanding the scientific the scientific knowledge knowledge and presents and a graphicalpresents a representationgraphical representation of the scientific of the scientific progress progress through throug theh centuries. the centuries. Section Section4 studies 4 studies the unreasonablethe unreasonable effectiveness effectiveness of mathematics of mathematics in the naturalin the natural sciences sciences (Winger’s (Winger’s enigma), enigma), while Sectionwhile 5 quantifiesSection 5 the quantifies degree ofthe truth degree of of the truth inductive of the in andductive deductive and deductive arguments. argume Thents. article The closesarticle closes with the generalwith conclusionsthe general conclusions presented inpresen Sectionted6 .in A Section schematic 6. A diagramschematic of diagram the proposed of the studyproposed is presented study is in Figurepresented1. in Figure 1. FigureFigure 1. 1.Schematic Schematic diagram of of the the proposed proposed study. study. TheThe novelty novelty of of the the present present article article isis thatthat it brings together together philosophy, philosophy, mathematics mathematics and and fuzzy fuzzy logic,logic, thus thus becoming becoming a challenge a challenge for for further further scientific scientif discussionic discussion on on the the subject. subject. This This is theis the added added value of thisvalue work. of this work. 2. Human2. Human Reasoning Reasoning and and Fuzzy Fuzzy Logic Logic InductionInduction and and deduction deduction are are the the two two fundamentalfundamental mechanisms mechanisms of of human human reasoning. reasoning. Roughly Roughly speaking,speaking, induction induction is is the the process process of ofgoing going fromfrom
Recommended publications
  • 1.2. INDUCTIVE REASONING Much Mathematical Discovery Starts with Inductive Reasoning – the Process of Reaching General Conclus
    1.2. INDUCTIVE REASONING Much mathematical discovery starts with inductive reasoning – the process of reaching general conclusions, called conjectures, through the examination of particular cases and the recognition of patterns. These conjectures are then more formally proved using deductive methods, which will be discussed in the next section. Below we look at three examples that use inductive reasoning. Number Patterns Suppose you had to predict the sixth number in the following sequence: 1, -3, 6, -10, 15, ? How would you proceed with such a question? The trick, it seems, is to discern a specific pattern in the given sequence of numbers. This kind of approach is a classic example of inductive reasoning. By identifying a rule that generates all five numbers in this sequence, your hope is to establish a pattern and be in a position to predict the sixth number with confidence. So can you do it? Try to work out this number before continuing. One fact is immediately clear: the numbers alternate sign from positive to negative. We thus expect the answer to be a negative number since it follows 15, a positive number. On closer inspection, we also realize that the difference between the magnitude (or absolute value) of successive numbers increases by 1 each time: 3 – 1 = 2 6 – 3 = 3 10 – 6 = 4 15 – 10 = 5 … We have then found the rule we sought for generating the next number in this sequence. The sixth number should be -21 since the difference between 15 and 21 is 6 and we had already determined that the answer should be negative.
    [Show full text]
  • There Is No Pure Empirical Reasoning
    There Is No Pure Empirical Reasoning 1. Empiricism and the Question of Empirical Reasons Empiricism may be defined as the view there is no a priori justification for any synthetic claim. Critics object that empiricism cannot account for all the kinds of knowledge we seem to possess, such as moral knowledge, metaphysical knowledge, mathematical knowledge, and modal knowledge.1 In some cases, empiricists try to account for these types of knowledge; in other cases, they shrug off the objections, happily concluding, for example, that there is no moral knowledge, or that there is no metaphysical knowledge.2 But empiricism cannot shrug off just any type of knowledge; to be minimally plausible, empiricism must, for example, at least be able to account for paradigm instances of empirical knowledge, including especially scientific knowledge. Empirical knowledge can be divided into three categories: (a) knowledge by direct observation; (b) knowledge that is deductively inferred from observations; and (c) knowledge that is non-deductively inferred from observations, including knowledge arrived at by induction and inference to the best explanation. Category (c) includes all scientific knowledge. This category is of particular import to empiricists, many of whom take scientific knowledge as a sort of paradigm for knowledge in general; indeed, this forms a central source of motivation for empiricism.3 Thus, if there is any kind of knowledge that empiricists need to be able to account for, it is knowledge of type (c). I use the term “empirical reasoning” to refer to the reasoning involved in acquiring this type of knowledge – that is, to any instance of reasoning in which (i) the premises are justified directly by observation, (ii) the reasoning is non- deductive, and (iii) the reasoning provides adequate justification for the conclusion.
    [Show full text]
  • Argument, Structure, and Credibility in Public Health Writing Donald Halstead Instructor and Director of Writing Programs Harvard TH Chan School of Public Heath
    Argument, Structure, and Credibility in Public Health Writing Donald Halstead Instructor and Director of Writing Programs Harvard TH Chan School of Public Heath Some of the most important questions we face in public health include what policies we should follow, which programs and research should we fund, how and where we should intervene, and what our priorities should be in the face of overwhelming needs and scarce resources. These questions, like many others, are best decided on the basis of arguments, a word that has its roots in the Latin arguere, to make clear. Yet arguments themselves vary greatly in terms of their strength, accuracy, and validity. Furthermore, public health experts often disagree on matters of research, policy and practice, citing conflicting evidence and arriving at conflicting conclusions. As a result, critical readers, such as researchers, policymakers, journal editors and reviewers, approach arguments with considerable skepticism. After all, they are not going to change their programs, priorities, practices, research agendas or budgets without very solid evidence that it is necessary, feasible, and beneficial. This raises an important challenge for public health writers: How can you best make your case, in the face of so much conflicting evidence? To illustrate, let’s assume that you’ve been researching mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of HIV in a sub-Saharan African country and have concluded that (claim) the country’s maternal programs for HIV counseling and infant nutrition should be integrated because (reasons) this would be more efficient in decreasing MTCT, improving child nutrition, and using scant resources efficiently. The evidence to back up your claim might consist of original research you have conducted that included program assessments and interviews with health workers in the field, your assessment of the other relevant research, the experiences of programs in other countries, and new WHO guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Machine Learning in Scientometrics
    DEPARTAMENTO DE INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL Escuela Tecnica´ Superior de Ingenieros Informaticos´ Universidad Politecnica´ de Madrid PhD THESIS Machine Learning in Scientometrics Author Alfonso Iba´nez˜ MS Computer Science MS Artificial Intelligence PhD supervisors Concha Bielza PhD Computer Science Pedro Larranaga˜ PhD Computer Science 2015 Thesis Committee President: C´esarHerv´as Member: Jos´eRam´onDorronsoro Member: Enrique Herrera Member: Irene Rodr´ıguez Secretary: Florian Leitner There are no secrets to success. It is the result of preparation, hard work, and learning from failure. Acknowledgements Ph.D. research often appears a solitary undertaking. However, it is impossible to maintain the degree of focus and dedication required for its completion without the help and support of many people. It has been a difficult long journey to finish my Ph.D. research and it is of justice to cite here all of them. First and foremost, I would like to thank Concha Bielza and Pedro Larra~nagafor being my supervisors and mentors. Without your unfailing support, recommendations and patient, this thesis would not have been the same. You have been role models who not only guided my research but also demonstrated your enthusiastic research attitudes. I owe you so much. Whatever research path I do take, I will be prepared because of you. I would also like to express my thanks to all my friends and colleagues at the Computa- tional Intelligence Group who provided me with not only an excellent working atmosphere and stimulating discussions but also friendships, care and assistance when I needed. My special thank-you goes to Rub´enArma~nanzas,Roberto Santana, Diego Vidaurre, Hanen Borchani, Pedro L.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of Fuzzy Query Based on Relation Database Dongmei Wei Liangzhong Yi Zheng Pei
    Application of Fuzzy Query Based on Relation Database Dongmei Wei Liangzhong Yi Zheng Pei School of Mathematics & Computer Engineering, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China Abstract SELECT <list of ¯elds> FROM <list of tables> ; The traditional query in relation database is unable WHERE <attribute> in <multi-valued attribute> to satisfy the needs for dealing with fuzzy linguis- tic values. In this paper, a new data query tech- SELECT <list of ¯elds> FROM <list of tables>; nique combined fuzzy theory and SQL is provided, WHERE NOT <condition> and the query can be implemented for fuzzy linguis- tic values query via a interface to Microsoft Visual SELECT <list of ¯elds> FROM <list of tables>; Foxpro. Here, we applied it to an realism instance, WHERE <subcondition> AND <subcondition> questions could be expressed by fuzzy linguistic val- ues such as young, high salary, etc, in Employee SELECT <list of ¯elds> FROM <list of tables>; relation database. This could be widely used to WHERE <subcondition> OR <subcondition> realize the other fuzzy query based on database. However, the Complexity is limited in precise data processing and is unable to directly express Keywords: Fuzzy query, Relation database, Fuzzy fuzzy concepts of natural language. For instance, theory, SQL, Microsoft visual foxpro in employees relation database, to deal with a query statement like "younger, well quali¯ed or better 1. Introduction performance ", it is di±cult to construct SQL be- cause the query words are fuzzy expressions. In Database management systems(DBMS) are ex- order to obtain query results, there are two basic tremely useful software products which have been methods of research in the use of SQL Combined used in many kinds of systems [1]-[3].
    [Show full text]
  • On Fuzzy and Rough Sets Approaches to Vagueness Modeling⋆ Extended Abstract
    From Free Will Debate to Embodiment of Fuzzy Logic into Washing Machines: On Fuzzy and Rough Sets Approaches to Vagueness Modeling⋆ Extended Abstract Piotr Wasilewski Faculty of Mathematics, Informatics and Mechanics University of Warsaw Banacha 2, 02-097 Warsaw, Poland [email protected] Deep scientific ideas have at least one distinctive property: they can be applied both by philosophers in abstract fundamental debates and by engineers in concrete practi- cal applications. Mathematical approaches to modeling of vagueness also possess this property. Problems connected with vagueness have been discussed at the beginning of XXth century by philosophers, logicians and mathematicians in developing foundations of mathematics leading to clarification of logical semantics and establishing of math- ematical logic and set theory. Those investigations led also to big step in the history of logic: introduction of three-valued logic. In the second half of XXth century some mathematical theories based on vagueness idea and suitable for modeling vague con- cepts were introduced, including fuzzy set theory proposed by Lotfi Zadeh in 1965 [16] and rough set theory proposed by Zdzis¸saw Pawlak in 1982 [4] having many practical applications in various areas from engineering and computer science such as control theory, data mining, machine learning, knowledge discovery, artificial intelligence. Concepts in classical philosophy and in mathematics are not vague. Classical the- ory of concepts requires that definition of concept C hast to provide exact rules of the following form: if object x belongs to concept C, then x possess properties P1,P2,...,Pn; if object x possess properties P1,P2,...,Pn, then x belongs to concept C.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Hotspots and Frontiers of Product R&D Management
    applied sciences Article Research Hotspots and Frontiers of Product R&D Management under the Background of the Digital Intelligence Era—Bibliometrics Based on Citespace and Histcite Hongda Liu 1,2, Yuxi Luo 2, Jiejun Geng 3 and Pinbo Yao 2,* 1 School of Economics & Management, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China; [email protected] or [email protected] 2 School of Management, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, China; [email protected] 3 School of Management, Shanghai International Studies University, Shanghai 200333, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: The rise of “cloud-computing, mobile-Internet, Internet of things, big-data, and smart-data” digital technology has brought a subversive revolution to enterprises and consumers’ traditional patterns. Product research and development has become the main battlefield of enterprise compe- Citation: Liu, H.; Luo, Y.; Geng, J.; tition, facing an environment where challenges and opportunities coexist. Regarding the concepts Yao, P. Research Hotspots and and methods of product R&D projects, the domestic start was later than the international ones, and Frontiers of Product R&D many domestic companies have also used successful foreign cases as benchmarks to innovate their Management under the Background management methods in practice. “Workers must first sharpen their tools if they want to do their of the Digital Intelligence jobs well”. This article will start from the relevant concepts of product R&D projects and summarize Era—Bibliometrics Based on current R&D management ideas and methods. We combined the bibliometric analysis software Citespace and Histcite. Appl. Sci. Histcite and Citespace to sort out the content of domestic and foreign literature and explore the 2021, 11, 6759.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychology 205, Revelle, Fall 2014 Research Methods in Psychology Mid-Term
    Psychology 205, Revelle, Fall 2014 Research Methods in Psychology Mid-Term Name: ________________________________ 1. (2 points) What is the primary advantage of using the median instead of the mean as a measure of central tendency? It is less affected by outliers. 2. (2 points) Why is counterbalancing important in a within-subjects experiment? Ensuring that conditions are independent of order and of each other. This allows us to determine effect of each variable independently of the other variables. If conditions are related to order or to each other, we are unable to determine which variable is having an effect. Short answer: order effects. 3. (6 points) Define reliability and compare it to validity. Give an example of when a measure could be valid but not reliable. 2 points: Reliability is the consistency or dependability of a measurement technique. [“Getting the same result” was not accepted; it was too vague in that it did not specify the conditions (e.g., the same phenomenon) in which the same result was achieved.] 2 points: Validity is the extent to which a measurement procedure actually measures what it is intended to measure. 2 points: Example (from class) is a weight scale that gives a different result every time the same person stands on it repeatedly. Another example: a scale that actually measures hunger but has poor test-retest reliability. [Other examples were accepted.] 4. (4 points) A consumer research company wants to compare the “coverage” of two competing cell phone networks throughout Illinois. To do so fairly, they have decided that they will only compare survey data taken from customers who are all using the same cell phone model - one that is functional on both networks and has been newly released in the last 3 months.
    [Show full text]
  • Download (Accessed on 30 July 2016)
    data Article Earth Observation for Citizen Science Validation, or Citizen Science for Earth Observation Validation? The Role of Quality Assurance of Volunteered Observations Didier G. Leibovici 1,* ID , Jamie Williams 2 ID , Julian F. Rosser 1, Crona Hodges 3, Colin Chapman 4, Chris Higgins 5 and Mike J. Jackson 1 1 Nottingham Geospatial Science, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2TU, UK; [email protected] (J.F.R.); [email protected] (M.J.J.) 2 Environment Systems Ltd., Aberystwyth SY23 3AH, UK; [email protected] 3 Earth Observation Group, Aberystwyth University Penglais, Aberystwyth SY23 3JG, UK; [email protected] 4 Welsh Government, Aberystwyth SY23 3UR, UK; [email protected] 5 EDINA, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH3 9DR, UK; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 28 August 2017; Accepted: 19 October 2017; Published: 23 October 2017 Abstract: Environmental policy involving citizen science (CS) is of growing interest. In support of this open data stream of information, validation or quality assessment of the CS geo-located data to their appropriate usage for evidence-based policy making needs a flexible and easily adaptable data curation process ensuring transparency. Addressing these needs, this paper describes an approach for automatic quality assurance as proposed by the Citizen OBservatory WEB (COBWEB) FP7 project. This approach is based upon a workflow composition that combines different quality controls, each belonging to seven categories or “pillars”. Each pillar focuses on a specific dimension in the types of reasoning algorithms for CS data qualification.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis - Identify Assumptions, Reasons and Claims, and Examine How They Interact in the Formation of Arguments
    Analysis - identify assumptions, reasons and claims, and examine how they interact in the formation of arguments. Individuals use analytics to gather information from charts, graphs, diagrams, spoken language and documents. People with strong analytical skills attend to patterns and to details. They identify the elements of a situation and determine how those parts interact. Strong interpretations skills can support high quality analysis by providing insights into the significance of what a person is saying or what something means. Inference - draw conclusions from reasons and evidence. Inference is used when someone offers thoughtful suggestions and hypothesis. Inference skills indicate the necessary or the very probable consequences of a given set of facts and conditions. Conclusions, hypotheses, recommendations or decisions that are based on faulty analysis, misinformation, bad data or biased evaluations can turn out to be mistaken, even if they have reached using excellent inference skills. Evaluative - assess the credibility of sources of information and the claims they make, and determine the strength and weakness or arguments. Applying evaluation skills can judge the quality of analysis, interpretations, explanations, inferences, options, opinions, beliefs, ideas, proposals, and decisions. Strong explanation skills can support high quality evaluation by providing evidence, reasons, methods, criteria, or assumptions behind the claims made and the conclusions reached. Deduction - decision making in precisely defined contexts where rules, operating conditions, core beliefs, values, policies, principles, procedures and terminology completely determine the outcome. Deductive reasoning moves with exacting precision from the assumed truth of a set of beliefs to a conclusion which cannot be false if those beliefs are untrue. Deductive validity is rigorously logical and clear-cut.
    [Show full text]
  • A Framework for Software Modelling in Social Science Re- Search
    A FRAMEWORK FOR SOFTWARE MODELLING IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH by Piper J. Jackson B.Sc., Simon Fraser University, 2005 B.A. (Hons.), McGill University, 1996 a Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Computing Science Faculty of Applied Sciences c Piper J. Jackson 2013 SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Summer 2013 All rights reserved. However, in accordance with the Copyright Act of Canada, this work may be reproduced without authorization under the conditions for \Fair Dealing." Therefore, limited reproduction of this work for the purposes of private study, research, criticism, review and news reporting is likely to be in accordance with the law, particularly if cited appropriately. APPROVAL Name: Piper J. Jackson Degree: Doctor of Philosophy Title of Thesis: A Framework for Software Modelling in Social Science Re- search Examining Committee: Dr. Steven Pearce Chair Dr. Uwe Gl¨asser Senior Supervisor Professor Dr. Vahid Dabbaghian Supervisor Adjunct Professor, Mathematics Associate Member, Computing Science Dr. Lou Hafer Internal Examiner Associate Professor Dr. Nathaniel Osgood External Examiner Associate Professor, University of Saskatchewan Date Approved: April 29, 2013 ii Partial Copyright Licence iii Abstract Social science is critical to decision making at the policy level. Software modelling and sim- ulation are innovative computational methods that provide alternative means of developing and testing theory relevant to policy decisions. Software modelling is capable of dealing with obstacles often encountered in traditional social science research, such as the difficulty of performing real-world experimentation. As a relatively new science, computational research in the social sciences faces significant challenges, both in terms of methodology and accep- tance.
    [Show full text]
  • Leveraging the Power of Place in Citizen Science for Effective Conservation Decision Making
    BIOC-06887; No of Pages 10 Biological Conservation xxx (2016) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bioc Leveraging the power of place in citizen science for effective conservation decision making G. Newman a,⁎,1,2, M. Chandler b,1,2,M.Clydec,1,2,B.McGreavyd,1,M.Haklaye,H.Ballardf, S. Gray g, R. Scarpino a,2, R. Hauptfeld a,2,D.Mellorh,J.Galloi,1 a Natural Resource Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA b Earthwatch Institute, Allston, MA 02134, USA c University of New Hampshire, Cooperative Extension, Durham, NH 03824-2500, USA d University of Maine, Department of Communication and Journalism, Orono, ME 04469, USA e University College London, WC1E 6BT London, UK f UC Davis, School of Education, Davis, CA 95616, USA g Department of Community Sustainability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA h Center for Open Science, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA i Conservation Biology Institute, Corvallis, OR 97333, USA article info abstract Article history: Many citizen science projects are place-based - built on in-person participation and motivated by local conserva- Received 16 October 2015 tion. When done thoughtfully, this approach to citizen science can transform humans and their environment. De- Received in revised form 19 May 2016 spite such possibilities, many projects struggle to meet decision-maker needs, generate useful data to inform Accepted 17 July 2016 decisions, and improve social-ecological resilience. Here, we define leveraging the ‘power of place’ in citizen sci- Available online xxxx ence, and posit that doing this improves conservation decision making, increases participation, and improves community resilience.
    [Show full text]