Zusammenfassung
Do computational social science and Big Data constitute a methodological revolution of the complex, data-intensive sciences? This question is approached by means of a quick analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT analysis) of the two approaches. It is concluded that computational social science and Big Data do mark an important methodological improvement but should probably not be qualified as “scientific revolution” or “paradigm change”. From the SWOT analysis it also follows that further research is necessary for a coherent development of computational social science and Big Data, in particular with respect to the ethics of privacy; balancing the low explanatory power of computational models; developing an epistemological position between naïve realism and radical constructivism; integrating computer science and social science.
Theodor Leiber is Associate Professor of Philosophy at University of Augsburg (Germany). He received doctorates in theoretical physics and philosophy. His main areas of interest are philosophy of science and technology, epistemology and ethics of nature. Leiber is also a higher education researcher focusing on models of teaching and learning, governance and impact analysis of quality management in higher education.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Anderson, C. 2008. The end of theory. Will the data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete? Edge. http://edge.org/3rd_culture/anderson08/anderson08_index.html. Access: June 28, 2015.
Bollier, D. 2010. The promise and peril of Big Data. Washington: The Aspen Institute. http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/docs/pubs/The_Promise_and_Peril_of_Big_Data.pdf. Access: June 28, 2015.
Boyd, D., and Crawford, K. 2012. Critical questions for Big Data. Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society 15(5), pp. 662-679.
Chang, R. M., Kauffman, R. J., and Kwon, Y. O. 2014. Understanding the paradigm shift to computational social science in the presence of big data. Decision Support Systems 63, pp. 67-80.
Ch’ng, E. 2014. The value of using Big Data technologies in Computational Social Science. 3rd ASE Big Data Science Conference, Tsinghua University Beijing, 3-7 August 2014, 4 pages. http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1408/1408.3170.pdf. Access: January 2, 2016.
Cioffi-Revilla, C. 2010. Computational social science. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Computational Statistics 2(3), pp. 259–271.
Cioffi-Revilla, C. 2013. Introduction to Computational Social Science. New York: Springer.
Conte, R., Gilbert, N., Bonelli, G., Cioffi-Revilla, C., Deffuant, G., Kertesz, J., Loreto, V., Moat, S., Nadal, J.-P., Sanchez, A., Nowak, A., Flache, A., San Miguel, M., and Helbing, D. 2012. Manifesto of Computational Social Science. The European Physical Journal Special Topics 214, pp. 325-346.
Conte, R., and Paolucci, M. 2014. On agent-based modeling and computational social science. Frontiers in Psychology 5 (art. 668), 9 pages. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4094840/pdf/fpsyg-05-00668.pdf. Access: January 01, 2016.
Epstein, J. M. 1999. Agent-based computational models and generative social science. Complexity 4(5), pp. 41-60.
Hedström, P., and Ylikoski, P. 2010. Causal mechanisms in the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology 36, pp. 49-67.
Kollman, K. 2012. The potential value of computational models in social science research. In H. Kincaid (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Social Science (pp. 355-383). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barbási, A.-L., Brewer, D., Christakis, N., Contractor, N., Fowler, J., Gutmann, M., Jebara, T., King, G., Macy, M., Roy, D., and van Alstyne, M. 2009. Computational social science. Science 323, pp. 721-723.
Leiber, T. 2007. Structuring nature’s and science’s complexity: System laws and explanations. In T. Leiber (Ed.), Dynamisches Denken und Handeln. Philosophie und Wissenschaft in einer komplexen Welt (pp. 193-212). Stuttgart: Hirzel.
Leiber, T., Stensaker, B., and Harvey, L. 2015. Impact evaluation of quality assurance in higher education: methodology and causal designs. Quality in Higher Education 21(3), pp. 288-311.
Little, D. 2011. Causal mechanisms in the social realm. In P. McKay Illari, F. Russo, & J. Williamson (Eds.), Causality in the Sciences (pp. 273-295). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mainzer, K. 2014. Die Berechnung der Welt. Von der Weltformel zu Big Data. München: Beck.
Manyika, J., Chui, M., Brown, B., Bughin, J., Dobbs, R., Roxburgh, C., and Byers, A. H. 2011 Big Data: the next frontier for innovation, competition, and productivity. McKinsey Global Institute Report, New York (May 2011), 20 pages.
Marr, B. 2015. Big Data: using SMART Big Data, analytics and metrics to make better decisions and improve performance. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Martin, K. E. 2015. Ethical issues in the Big Data industry. MIS Quarterly Executive 14(2), pp. 67-85.
Pentland, A. 2012. Reinventing society in the wake of big data. Edge. http://edge.org/conversation/reinventing-society-in-the-wake-of-big-data. Access: June 28, 2015.
Pietsch, W. 2015. The causal nature of modelling with Big Data. Philosophy and Technology. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13347-015-0202-2. Access: June 28, 2015.
Rabari, C. 2013. Big Data: The promise of a “Computational” social science. Critical Planning. A Journal of the UCLA Urban Planning Department 20, pp. 27-44.
Reichert, R. (Ed.). 2014. Big Data. Analysen zum digitalen Wandel von Wissen, Macht und Ökonomie. Bielefeld: transcript.
Runkel, P. J., and McGrath, J. E. 1972. Research on human behaviour: a systematic guide to method. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Russom, P. 2011. Big Data analytics. Best practices report, fourth quarter 2011. Renton (WA): The Data Warehouse Institute. http://www.sas.com/content/dam/SAS/en_us/doc/research2/big-data-analytics-105425.pdf. Access: January 30, 2016.
Ruths, D., and Pfeffer, J. 2014. Social media for large studies of behaviour. Science 346, pp. 1063-1064.
Shah, D. V., Cappella, J. N., and Neuman, W. R. 2015. Big Data, digital media, and computational social science: Possibilities and perils. Annals, American Academy of Political and Social Science 659, pp. 6-13.
Steel, D. 2011. Causality, causal models, and social mechanisms. In I. C. Jarvie & J. Zamora- Bonilla (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of the Philosophy of Social Sciences (pp. 288-304). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Twombly, M. 2011. Introduction: challenges and opportunities. Science 331(6018), pp. 692-693.
Wallach, H. 2015. Computational social science: toward a collaborative future. http://dirichlet.net/pdf/wallach15computational.pdf. Access: June 28, 2015.
Watts, D. J. 2013. Computational social science. Exciting progress and future directions. The Bridge 43(4), pp. 5-10.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Leiber, T. (2017). Computational Social Science and Big Data: A Quick SWOT Analysis. In: Pietsch, W., Wernecke, J., Ott, M. (eds) Berechenbarkeit der Welt?. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12153-2_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-12153-2_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-12152-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-12153-2
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)