Abstract
Through a systematic review of the paradigm of contemporary social science research, this paper explores the changes that technologies and algorithms bring to traditional social science methodology. There is a large amount of literature discussing how the application of newly developed technologies provides new solutions to old problems, but little research has been done on how they reshape old problems into new ones. Specifically, how does the development of research tools restructure the criteria for a good study and determine the right questions to ask, and how do computer simulations and artificial intelligence reform social science methodology by changing our presuppositions about humans and society? This article intends to fill the gap by analyzing the evolution of social science methodology and its epistemological impacts.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ahern, K.J. 1999. Ten tips for reflexive bracketing. Qualitative Health Research 9 (3): 407–411.
Anderson C (2008) The end of theory: the data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired Magazine. https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/
Brenner J, Smith A (2013) 72% of online adults are social networking site users
Comte, A. 1876. Course of positive philosophy. London: George Bell & Sons.
Custers, B. 1866. Data dilemmas in the information society: introduction and overview. In Discrimination and privacy in the information society, ed. B. Custers, T. Calders, B. Schermer, and T. Zarsky. Berlin: Springer.
Epstein, J.M., and R. Axtell. 1996. Growing artificial societies: social science from the bottom up. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
Gantz J, Reinsel D (2012) The digital universe in 2020: big data, bigger digital shadows, and biggest growth in the fareast. http://www.emc.com/leadership/digital-universe/2012iview/index.htm
Gilbert, N., and K. Troitzsch. 2005. Simulation for the social scientist. UK: McGraw-Hill Education.
Hacking, I. 1995. The looping effects of human kinds. In Causal cognition: a multi-disciplinary debate, ed. D. Sperber, D. Premack, and A. James Premack, 351–394. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hall, P., and R.C.R. Taylor. 1996. Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Stud 44 (5): 936–957.
Helmreich, S. 2000. Silicon second nature: culturing artificial life in a digital world. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Hempel, C.G. 1980. Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. Illinois: The Free Press.
Jun, L. 2020. Computing, simulation and experiment: three research methods of computational social science (计算· 模拟· 实验: 计算社会科学的三大研究方法). Academic Forum 1: 35–49.
Kitchin, R. 2014. Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data Society 1 (1): 1–12.
Laney, D. 2001. 3D data management: controlling data volume, velocity, and variety. META Group Research Note 6.
Mahmoodi, J., et al. 2017. Big data approaches in social and behavioral science: four key trade-offs and a call for integration. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 18: 57–62.
Mi, J., C. Zhang, D. Li, and T. Lin. 2018. Fourth research paradigm: transformation of social science research driven by big data (第四研究范式: 大数据驱动的社会科学研究转型). Academia Bimestrie 2: 11–27.
Persson, J. 2012. Mechanistic explanation in social contexts: Elster and the problem of local scientific growth. Social Epistemology 26 (1): 105–114.
Risjord, M. 2014. Philosophy of social science: a contemporary introduction. London: Routledge.
Salmon, W.C. 1971. Statistical explanation. In Statistical explanation and statistical relevance, ed. W.C. Salmon, 29–87. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Salmon, W.C. 1984. Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Salmon, W.C. 1989. Four decades of scientific explanation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Tansley, S., and K.M. Tolle. 2009. The fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery. WA: Microsoft Research.
Tracy, S.J. 2010. Qualitative quality: eight ‘big-tent’ criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry 16 (10): 837–851.
Turow, J. 2012. The daily you: how the new advertising industry is defining your identity and your worth. Berkeley: Yale University Press.
Wang, F., and J. Lansing. 2004. From artificial life to artificial societies——new methods for studies of complex social systems (从人工生命到人工社会——复杂社会系统研究的现状和展望). Complex Syst Complex Sci 1: 33–41.
Winter, J.S. 2014. Surveillance in ubiquitous network societies: normative conflicts related to the consumer in-store supermarket experience in the context of the internet of things. Ethics Inf Technolo 16 (1): 27–41.
Winter, J.S. 2015. Algorithmic discrimination: big data analytics and the future of the internet. In The future internet, ed. R. Jenifer Winter and Ono,. Cham: Springer.
Xie, L. 2019. Re-discussion on the relationship between quantitative approach and qualitative approach in the field of social research. Hebei Acad J 39 (2): 160–170.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Qin, X. Intelligent Technologies and Methodological Transformations in the Social Sciences. Chin. Polit. Sci. Rev. 9, 1–17 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-021-00197-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41111-021-00197-y