Hallo all. Thanks for this high-quality discussion that is itself very worthwhile.
I very much like the fact that in JASSS both theories and the models based on them are taken seriously.
Gert Jan
-----Original Message-----
From: News and discussion about computer simulation in the social sciences [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Pietro Terna
Sent: dinsdag 2 december 2014 23:07
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [SIMSOC] JASSS "Scope"
I absolutely stay strictly to this, thanks for expressing it in such a way,
Pietro
Il 02/12/14 22:56, Kathleen Carley ha scritto:
> I think that some of that would be fine - but one thing that has kept
> JASSS special vis the other simulation journals has been the
> social/theory side of things and the philosophy of simulation. I think
> we would want to keep that and not just focus on techniques and math.
>
>
> On 12/2/2014 1:29 PM, Sallach, David L. wrote:
>> I agree that JASSS has been open to all the social sciences, plus
>> other research domains in which research strategies are
>> methodologically relevant. If we wish to emphasize
>> interdisciplinarity in the journal, we may want to especially
>> encourage research that explores cross-domain interaction.
>>
>> As long as we are having this type of discussion, there is another
>> question that pertains to JASSS focus. If the progression of other
>> disciplines is any indication, we can expect the role of simulation
>> in the research process to shift. More innovations will be in domain
>> mathematics and/or its validation, with simulation models exploring
>> the resulting spaces and shapes, including how the modeled processes
>> scale up. Should we expect JASSS to publish mathematical innovations
>> and their associated validation techniques, as well as the simulation itself?
>>
>> David L. Sallach, Social Scientist
>> Social and Behavioral Systems
>> Systems Science Center
>> Global Security Sciences Division
>> Argonne National Laboratory
>> 9700 South Cass Avenue
>> Argonne, IL 60439
>> (630) 252-5760
>>
>> From: Claudio Cioffi-Revilla <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Reply-To: Claudio Cioffi-Revilla <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Date: Tuesday, December 2, 2014 at 8:51 AM
>> To: "[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>"
>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Subject: Re: [SIMSOC] JASSS "Scope"
>>
>> JASSS as it has always been: focused on computational social science,
>> not on just computational sociology. Many excellent papers across
>> *all* the social sciences, and complex adaptive social systems, have
>> been published in the Journal, including computational sociology. My
>> own research interests are on conflict, climate change, disasters,
>> complex crises, and CSS methodology, and I have always seen JASSS as
>> a premier outlet for all of these and other topics, as long as the
>> CSS approach is central. JASSS is a great asset to the CSS community
>> precisely because it has managed to stay away from a single
>> computational discipline. It should remain that way and stay abreast
>> of the latest developments and advances in CSS.
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> Claudio Cioffi-Revilla, Ph.D.
>> Professor of Computational Social Science Interim Vice President for
>> Research Director, Center for Social Complexity George Mason
>> University
>> 4400 University Drive, MSN 3A2
>> Fairfax, Virginia 22030 USA
>> Tel. (703) 993-2268 | kheflin2 AT gmu DOT edu Executive Assistant:
>> Ms. Kelly Heflin
>>
>> /All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the
>> point is to discover them.-/Galileo Galilei
>>
>>> On Dec 2, 2014, at 8:00 AM, Edmund Chattoe-Brown
>>> <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All,
>>>
>>> Three thoughts:
>>>
>>> 1) Having one paper rejected is not very good evidence for base for
>>> any "trend" in the policy or publication pattern of JASSS. Even
>>> having it published in a paper with a higher IF doesn't necessarily
>>> make it a better paper. (This is a worryingly common delusion amongst academics:
>>> See ""Censorship", Early Childhood Research Quarterly and
>>> Qualitative
>>> Research: Not So Much Aced Out as an Own Goal?" on
>>> https://leicester.academia.edu/EdmundChattoeBrown.)
>>> 2) JASSS can only publish what it receives. It is possible that, for
>>> example, psychology is less aware on average of this as a publishing
>>> outlet than sociology is. That is certainly something that could be
>>> investigated (and ESSA is already offering money to reach new
>>> communities) but I doubt it is a "policy" nor resolvable by policy.
>>> 3) I am not sure that the pursuit of impact factor is a very wise goal.
>>> A free online journal will always get a "boost" over a print journal
>>> (because increasingly people cite what they can get not what they
>>> need.) It may be a tactless example but an IF of 1.733 puts JASSS at
>>> 29 in the
>>> 138 journal sociology list. That is pretty good for such a
>>> specialist journal. Many of the journals above it are general and
>>> the specialist ones usually have large practitioner readerships
>>> (Journal of Marriage and the Family, Sociology of Education.) There
>>> are a few exceptions to these patterns but on the whole I doubt we
>>> would _expect_ to be able to beat most of these journals in impact.
>>> Let's submit, review and publish the best articles we can (so that
>>> people will want to cite them) and the IF will take care of itself.
>>>
>>> I think there are useful discussions to be had about reaching and
>>> including small or nascent ABM communities (history, criminology,
>>> education, Social Network Analysis) both for JASSS and ESSA/WCSS but
>>> this is a matter of "marketing" and personal contact/persuasion not
>>> JASSS "policy". Inviting these groups to put together themes, tracks
>>> or special issues is an option (as would be commissioning rolling
>>> subject area reviews: See American Behavioural Scientist 1999,
>>> 42(10) for four
>>> examples) but this doesn't really bear on the bulk of JASSS business.
>>> (To get JASSS rolling back in 1998, we did a lot of persuasion to
>>> get credible submissions until after a year or so people would do it
>>> themselves. If we want more psych - or whatever - in JASSS, who
>>> knows a really good "mainstream" psych who would be willing to be
>>> persuaded to put something in?)
>>>
>>> All the best,
>>>
>>> Edmund
>>>
>>> --
>>> Edmund Chattoe-Brown
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>
>>> --
>>> http://www.fastmail.com - Accessible with your email software
>>> or over the web
--
The world is full of interesting problems to be solved!
Home page http://web.econ.unito.it/terna
|