Archive for April, 2010

Ritualistic Science

April 18, 2010

Much of “science” today is not so much scientific as scientistic. That means that the forms and behaviors of science are used, but the underlying logic is missing. Scientism is very much like the phenomenon of cargo cults, in which Pacific islanders built airports and control towers out of wood in order to bring back the planes that came with World War II. They didn’t realize that air traffic control panels actually did something, so they simply built facsimiles out of wood.

We can see scientism in every aspect of published research today. We see it in papers that think that theory is a set of interconnected hypotheses, rather than as the reason why X leads to Y. We see it in work in which each hypothesis is justified by a collection of independent, even mutually contradictory, reasons why the hypothesis must be true. Instead of the hypotheses being tests of an underlying theory, the hypotheses are the principal claims of the theory, and the justifications for these hypothesis can be a smorgasbord of ideas that embody entirely different theories.

Another aspect of scientism is the belief that there are universal best practices in research that are independent of the research question and the research setting. As a result, there is a great deal of argumentation from authority. E.g., we use this measure because so and so did. We even see it used to justify hypothesis: we expect X to lead to Y because so-and-so said it would.

A tiny example of this ritualistic belief in best practices can be found in network analysis where people argue that certain variables *must* be collected. For example, it has been claimed that in organizational network research, every study must measure the “workflow” network, which indicates who is required to interact with whom because of the nature of their jobs. The idea is that this set of ties can determine many other ties, such as interaction, and so must be taken account of, regardless of the study objectives.

To borrow a page from the scientistic consider the following counter-argument from authority. Ron Burt is a major luminary in the field who has published more than 100 papers on dozens of research projects. How many of these included the workflow network? None. Mark Granovetter is also a major luminary. Does his work take account of the workflow network? No. What about Jim Coleman? Brian Uzzi? Jim Moody? Woody Powell? Anybody?

Graduate students need to be inoculated to generate antibodies against any prescription of this kind. The moment someone says “you can’t do meaningful research unless you include < insert favorite variable >” your scientific spider sense should start tingling and you should become wary. Such rules serve to replace and obviate the need for thought.

Advertisements

Apple’s negative ties

April 17, 2010

Dan Halgin pointed this out to me. I wish they had included Adobe and Amazon as well:

Duke Political Networks Conference May 19-21, 2010

April 17, 2010

Dear Networkers,

The program for the upcoming Duke Political Networks Conference has been posted online at

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mheaney/Duke_Conference_Program.pdf

Please check your role at the conference and bring any concerns to my attention as soon as possible.

Our guaranteed rate of $129 per night at the Washington Duke Inn and Golf Club is ending on Sunday, April 18. For more information about hotel and travel, go to

http://www.poli.duke.edu/politicalnetworks/travel.html

We are still working out the details for the online paper archive where the papers will be posted. We are asking that papers be posted by Wednesday, May 12, one week before the start of the conference. I hope to send out the instructions for uploading the papers shortly.

If you have not yet registered, please do so ASAP at  http://www.poli.duke.edu/politicalnetworks/index.php

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about program or Mike Ward (mw160@duke.edu) if you have any questions about logistics or other hosting arrangements.

We very much look forward to seeing you soon at the 3rd Annual Political Networks Conference.

Sincerely,

Michael T. Heaney, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Organizational Studies & Political Science
University of Michigan
722 Dennison Building
500 Church Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1042
Cell phone: 202-236-3369
E-mail: mheaney@umich.edu
http://www.umich.edu/~mheaney/