1,721,104 research outputs found
Transparency comes at a serious cost : An agent-based model of open vs. confidential peer review in science
No full textThis paper looks at peer review as a cooperation dilemma between scientists who might follow different strategies of behaviour that are sensitive to contextual conditions more than social predispositions. While Robert Merton suggested that scientists are actors who are socialised to certain, functional social norms, which depended on the historical institutionalisation of the scientific community, Pierre Bourdieu viewed scientists as mere "rational" actors competing individually or in groups for power, recognition and influence. The growing competition in science at all levels, the increasing demand for transparency and accountability of the process by various stakeholders, the disruptive technological innovation applied to the management of the publishing process, as well as the increasing complexity of scientific endeavour today, seem to indicate that these two competing theories cannot be straightforwardly falsified and could even be equally true, depending on specific conditions.
By extending a previous agent-based model of peer review [Squazzoni & Gandelli 2012, Journal of Informetrics], which was built to look at implications of behavioural strategies of scientists on the quality and efficiency of peer review, we tested different conditions that can make scientist strategies intelligible and their consequences measurable, at least in an artificial model.
We first assumed that reviewers could behave randomly (“random” baseline conditions) by providing random evaluations of the author submission quality and measured: (i) system evaluation bias in terms of misallocation of publication, (ii) resources lost by productive authors who were not published although deserved it, and (iii) reviewing expenses, i.e., the level of resources invested in reviewing compared to those invested in publishing at the system level.
We built a second scenario in which reviewer reliability depended on previous success/failure as author (“indirect reciprocity” scenario). In this case, reviewers would follow an “indirect reciprocity” strategies in that, if previously published, they would reciprocate by providing reliable reviews to other authors when casted as reviewers next, whereas, if previously rejected, they would reciprocate by providing unreliable reviews in turn.
In the last scenario, we assumed that peer review was not confidential but open and transparent so that the names of reviewers were visible to authors (as recently advocated by many analysts and supporters of the open peer review model and implemented in some journals like F1000, Economics E-Journal). This implies that scientists could play direct reciprocity strategies, by supporting reviewers who helped them to get published when authors and punishing those one who contributed to their rejection, when they were authors previously.
In the last scenarios, we tested situations in which scientists reciprocate previous experiences not because of previous publication success/failure but by estimating the degree of proximity/distance between the “objective” value of their submission and the rating expressed by the reviewer. In this case, scientists looked at the pertinence of reviewer opinion rather than at their success and so were more critical on the quality of their own work.
Results showed that, unlike common sense, the random walk is not the worst-case scenario in peer review. Indeed, the quality of peer review dramatically decreases when reviewers follow selfish strategies. Furthermore, we found that open and transparent peer review is the worst-case scenario in case reviewers do not look at the pertinence of reviewer opinion when authors previously but reflect only selfishly their publication score.
Although abstract and not directly linked to empirical data, our findings help to discuss implications of Bourdieunian competitive spirits in the scientific community and indicate that Mertonian social norms of the scientific community must not be taken for granted but reinforced by exploring new rewards and sanctioning systems
The shadow of reciprocity on confidential vs. open peer review: An agent-based model
No full textThis paper presents an agent-based model of peer review that looks at potential con-sequences of reciprocity strategies by scientists on the quality and efficiency of the process. We analyzed scientist strategies in two conditions: (i) when peer review is confidential and anony-mous; (ii) when peer review is open. We built three scenarios through which we manipulated reviewer behavior: reliable (reviewers always cooperate by providing pertinent opinion), unre-liable (reviewers always defect by providing biased opinion) and strategic (reviewers overvalue other’s work when previously published and vice versa) reviewers. Results showed that the effect of reciprocity strategies on the quality of peer review might be detrimental. This is even more dramatic when peer review is open, as scientists could play Tit-for-Tat direct reciprocity against other colleagues, which may dramatically biases their personal judgement
Internationalizing Sociology in Italy, 1970s-2010s
No full textItalian sociologists work in a wide range of educational and research institutions located in different regions of Italy. Established hiring and promotion practices – developed through a complicated mix of top-down regulations, co-existing and conflictual “paradigmatic” schools and local “cliques” – have allowed sociologists to expand their academic influence and find positions in many institutions. For example, across Italy’s universities, the number of sociology faculty is similar to that of economists (around 1,000 full, associate and assistant professors). However, while this may show our community’s successful evolution it is unclear whether these practices have truly fueled excellent research, or have jeopardized it.
To develop some quantitative insight into Italian sociologists’ publications, we took the names of all 1,227 Italian sociologists (including post-docs enrolled in 2016) from the MIUR (Italian Ministry of University and Research) website, and then searched the Scopus data set, which includes international journals, conference proceedings, monographs and book chapters, as well as the most prestigious national journals, from the 1970s to 2010s.
We found that 63.8% of Italian sociologists have at least one publication indexed in Scopus. This means that one out of three sociologists in Italy does not have a single record in recognized international journals, conference proceedings, book series or Italy’s most prestigious journals.
A few Italian sociologists’ names appear frequently in the data set. For example, five individuals have published more than 35 indexed publications. On the other hand, about 20% (249 sociologists) have published only one article in their whole career. If we consider the impact of publications, we found that 52.4% (1,840 out of 3,515 publications) had no citations reflected in the data.
Interestingly, the data suggested a geographical divide. Sociologists working in Northern (45.5%) and Central (27.2%) universities published significantly more than those working in Southern universities, suggesting either self-selection bias or a negative context effect, perhaps reflecting uneven socio-economic development across geographical regions. However, only further analysis of university hiring process, which would require reconstructing hiring committees and candidates via the MIUR database, could reveal whether this bias is more due to self-selection and homophily than to context effects.
While observers of Italian academy may not be surprised at this finding, we found other interesting results when time series were included. We considered international co-authorships, which suggest sociologists are more active in the international community and so more exposed to international research standards. After counting the number of non-Italian co-authors as a proportion of the total number of co-authors for each single individual, and scaling data over time, we found that the rate of international collaborations has significantly increased in recent years, as did the number of publications. These trends are quite similar, with a growth of more than 50% of international collaborations over the past ten years (see figure).
Although further analysis would require looking systematically at causal factors, this trend is probably a positive result of ANVUR (the Italian national agency for the evaluation of the university and research system) national research assessment, which was established in 2010 and assessed sociology research published from 2004. Although it takes time for scientists to adapt their publication strategies, many sociologists who were not particularly familiar with international journals probably realized the importance of publishing in well-established outlets. Alternatively, sociologists who published internationally may have decided to invest even more in international publications to pay off an initial investment.
We do not want to suggest that institutional pressures have simple Darwinian effects, in which scientists simply adapt to increase their fitness. However, increased competition for funds at national and international levels and growing attention to university and department productivity could promote increased internationalization and the importance of publishing in prestigious international journals for the purposes of increasing their academic reputation. In a nutshell, we could say “Eppur si muove” – “And yet it moves”!
Direct all correspondence to Flaminio Squazzoni <[email protected]
Informatica ed elettronica negli anni Sessanta. Il ruolo di Roberto Olivetti attraverso l'Archivio storico della Società Olivetti
No full textIl saggio analizza lo sviluppo del settore dell'elettronica e dell'informatica nell'a società Olivetti e la dissoluzione di questa area di produzione e delle sue spinte innovatrici a livello della società italiana del dopoguerra tra gli anni cinquanta e gli anni sessanta, in comparazione col contesto internazionale (Europa e Stati Uniti
Modelling and social science : problems and promises
No full textFormalised models are simplified representations of empirical phenomena that help to abstract away essential mechanisms from details and contexts. Although (mathematical or computational) modelling has always had a contested status in the social sciences, the use of formalised models is key to integrate abstract theorisation and inductive empiricism. This is especially true for agent-based modelling (ABM), which is a computational method which allows social scientists to study aggregate patterns as consequences of complex agent interaction. Unlike standard mathematical and statistical models, ABM permits us to consider heterogeneity, autonomy and local interaction, as well as the effect of institutional, structural or spatial environmental constraints. Simulations are then performed to observe and visualise aggregate properties and understand complex time-space dynamics at micro and macro scales. Considering the (ethical and economic) constraints on experiments in the social sciences, modelling and simulation are instrumental to test the logical coherence of theories, scale up microscopic observations and perform counterfactual analysis when scenario manipulations are difficult or impossible to perform in reality
Gender bias in the classroom: A network study on self and peer ability attribution
Full text linkStereotypes can contribute to the gender gap in STEM by shaping people’s expectations on their own and others’ performance. When gender is salient, expectations on task performance might reflect gender constructs even when information on individual abilities is available. We tested this hypothesis in a network study on students from ten high school classes in Milan, Italy. We asked the students to choose the four best candidates from their classmates for three hypothetical inter-class competitions in reading, math, and science. Results showed that females were more likely to be nominated for the reading competition but less likely for science. We did not find any statistically significant results for the math competition. We also found that female students were less likely to nominate themselves for any competition, regardless of the subject, even controlling for their own performance and self-concept
Does Competition Always Undermine solidarity? Cohesion and Integration of Support Networks among Business Partners
No full textThis study aims to understand the consequences of competition between collaborating partners on the emergence of solidarity relations. Previous research has suggested that peers engaging in successful economic exchanges, e.g. professional collaboration between independent workers, can develop expectations of social support that eventually give rise to mutual solidarity (Bianchi et al. 2017; see also Molm et al. 2007, 2009; Kuwabara 2011). This can occur via the formation of trust based on experiences of successful cooperation, which in turn fosters confidence in receiving social support. Yet, this mechanism may hinge upon the beneficial condition of absence of competition among partners, i.e., a complication that previous research has not yet explored theoretically.
Here, we modelled a network of independent economic agents with a mix of incentives for competition and cooperation. Potential collaboration partners often compete over highest-skilled or most attractive partners, due to the unequal distribution of cognitive or material resources in a network. To understand if heterogeneity between actors may influence the structure of solidarity relations, we developed a computational model that derives the dynamics of network structure from interdependent actions of economic agents. We conducted experiments that vary heterogeneity of the distribution of both resource endowment and need for support between agents.
To look at network dynamics, we are drawing on an adaptation of the computational modelling component of Snijders’ Stochastic Actor-Based Model (1996; see also Snijders & Steglich 2015). Our model includes a multiplex network of interdependent dynamics of three types of networks, including relations of collaboration, trust and social support expectations. Our computational experiments allowed us to study effects of heterogeneity on the connectivity and integration of the emergent social support networks.
Preliminary results show that competition in collaboration is detrimental for the connectivity of the emergent social support network if resource heterogeneity is sufficiently high. Moreover, the emergent networks are highly segregated along differences in resource levels. This gives rise to a core-periphery structure in which resource rich actors find the most attractive partners to relate to. However, once heterogeneity in need for support is added, the effect of resource heterogeneity is neutralized by a ‘double-edge’ effect of heterogeneity on social support relations. Resource poor but needy actors establish mutual help relations due to their stronger social activity in search for attractive partners, which makes them less peripheral in the emergent network than without heterogeneity in neediness. Finally, in our model resource inequality can also generate networks where the level of integration between high- and low-resource agents is similar to what is produced in absence of competition
Da collaborazione a solidarietà : fiducia e supporto tra professionisti in uno spazio di coworking
No full textWhile the social sciences have acquired considerable knowledge of how solidarity is enhanced by institutional and organizational configurations, less is known about endogenous mechanisms eliciting solidary behaviour within networks of economic exchange. To fill this gap, we analyzed the formation of support ties within a multiplex network of independent workers who spontaneously collaborate as peers without any formal organizational structure.
Drawing on the literature on reciprocity and solidarity within Social Exchange Theory, we tested: (i) Trust in business as a mechanism underlying the relationship between collaboration and non work-related support; (ii) the endogenous effects of direct and indirect reciprocity on the emergence of a support network.
We collected network and demographic data through a questionnaire, which has been administered to all the 29 freelancers who share a coworking space in Brescia, Italy. This group has been selected because the coworking space did not have any formal organizational structure providing incentives for collaboration between its members. This was an ideal context for disentangling the spontaneous formation of support ties from business interactions. The data collection followed a 3-month ethnographic pre-study, which helped understand the context, obtain full participation to the survey, and calibrate the questionnaire.
Network data have been collected by means of the name-generator approach. Support was measured by asking each subject whom they would turn to in case of need of material and emotional help for non work-related issues. A collaboration matrix resulted from the integration of data on incoming and outgoing flows of transactions, weighted by the respective satisfaction level. In order to test the role of business-related trust, subjects have been asked to cite trustworthy people as potential business partners. Finally, data about covariate networks have been collected as control factors: advice-seeking within the previous 12 months, friendship, and previous acquaintance. We also gathered data about sociodemographic and business-related characteristics of the actors (age, gender, education, seniority, business revenues) and measured their baseline levels of generalized trust and group identification.
We simulated the emergence of the networks of support and trust by applying a family of multivariate exponential random graph models, controlling for actor-relation effects and exogenous effects yielded by covariate networks. Our hypotheses have been tested by obtaining maximum likelihood estimates of the effect of various local network configurations on the observed networks.
We found that expectations of support were not significantly reciprocated in a direct way, nor did they form cycles of generalized exchange. Conversely, support ties appeared to coalesce into local clusters by following transitive paths. Thus, the results suggest the emergence of informal local hierarchies, which drive the formation of expectations of support. Finally, we observed that trusting another freelancer for business purposes significantly fosters expectations of support even for non work-related issues.
In conclusion, our work suggests that trust in business is likely to work as a mechanism for the formation of solidarity among coworking peers with no formal organizational structure. Moreover, our study provides an interesting insight on the way informal hierarchical structures may emerge among peers
Coworking and social support among peers : a multivariate ERGM of economic and social exchange between ICT freelancers
No full textThis work aims at understanding how social support ties form from economic exchange. We studied a multiplex network of instrumental and expressive relationships in a group of independent workers who occasionally collaborate for business purposes.
We tested (i) the effect of professional collaborations on the formation of support ties; (ii) the role of business-related trust as a mechanism underlying this relationship; (iii) the endogenous effects of reciprocity and closure on the formation of a support network.
We collected network and demographic data through a questionnaire, which was personally administered to all the 29 freelance workers who share an ICT- focused coworking space located in Brescia, North-western Italy. This group was selected because the coworking space did not have any formal organizational structure providing incentives to professional collaboration between its members. This was an ideal context for disentangling the spontaneous formation of social ties from economic interactions. The data collection followed a 3-month ethnographic pre-study, which helped to understand the context, obtain full participation to the survey, and calibrate the questionnaire.
Network data have been collected by means of the name-generator approach. Social support was measured by asking each subject potential whom they would turn to in case of need of material and emotional help for non work-related issues. A professional collaboration matrix resulted from the integration of data on incoming and outgoing flows of transactions, weighted by the related satisfaction level. In order to test the role of business-related trust, subjects were asked to cite trustworthy people as potential business partners. Finally, data about covariate networks were collected as control factors: advice-seeking within the previous 12 months, friendship, and previous acquaintance. We also gathered data about sociodemographic and business-related characteristics of the actors (age, gender, education, seniority, business revenues) and measured their baseline levels of generalized trust and group identification.
We modeled social support together with trust by applying a family of multivariate exponential random graph models, controlling for actor-relation effects and exogenous effects yielded by covariate networks.
We found that reciprocity was not essential for the formation of support ties. Conversely, we found a positive effect of path closure and a non-significant effect of cyclic closure. This suggests the emergence of local clusters where coworkers provide support by following transitive paths. Together with a strong negative effect of indegree centralization, our results show a globally decentralized flow of support which clusters locally around emergent hierarchies.
With regards to multivariate effects, collaborating with another freelancer seems to increase the likelihood of developing expectations of support, regardless of the level of satisfaction with the business partner. Finally, trusting another freelancer for business purposes tends to foster expectations of support, also controlling for the other covariate networks.
In conclusion, our work suggests that non-instrumental support is likely to align with trust in economic exchanges, while the outcome of a collaboration seems to be less relevant. Moreover, our study provides an interesting insight on the way informal hierarchical structures emerge among peers
- …
