IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2009-58-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Simulations: Improving Interdisciplinary Understanding of Scientific Positioning and Validity

Author

Abstract

Because of features that appear to be inherent in many social systems, modellers face complicated and subjective choices in positioning the scientific contribution of their research. This leads to a diversity of approaches and terminology, making interdisciplinary assessment of models highly problematic. Such modellers ideally need some kind of accessible, interdisciplinary framework to better understand and assess these choices. Existing texts tend either to take a specialised metaphysical approach, or focus on more pragmatic aspects such as the simulation process or descriptive protocols for how to present such research. Without a sufficiently neutral treatment of why a particular set of methods and style of model might be chosen, these choices can become entwined with the ideological and terminological baggage of a particular discipline. This paper attempts to provide such a framework. We begin with an epistemological model, which gives a standardised view on the types of validation available to the modeller, and their impact on scientific value. This is followed by a methodological framework, presented as a taxonomy of the key dimensions over which approaches are ultimately divided. Rather than working top-down from philosophical principles, we characterise the issues as a practitioner would see them. We believe that such a characterisation can be done 'well enough', where 'well enough' represents a common frame of reference for all modellers, which nevertheless respects the essence of the debate's subtleties and can be accepted as such by a majority of 'methodologists'. We conclude by discussing the limitations of such an approach, and potential further work for such a framework to be absorbed into existing, descriptive protocols and general social simulation texts.

Suggested Citation

  • Stuart Rossiter & Jason Noble & Keith R.W. Bell, 2010. "Social Simulations: Improving Interdisciplinary Understanding of Scientific Positioning and Validity," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10.
  • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2009-58-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/13/1/10/10.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Howick, Susan & Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran & Williams, Terry, 2008. "Building confidence in models for multiple audiences: The modelling cascade," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(3), pages 1068-1083, May.
    2. Thomas Brenner & Claudia Werker, 2004. "Empirical Calibration of Simulation Models," Computing in Economics and Finance 2004 89, Society for Computational Economics.
    3. Paul Windrum & Giorgio Fagiolo & Alessio Moneta, 2007. "Empirical Validation of Agent-Based Models: Alternatives and Prospects," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 10(2), pages 1-8.
    4. Matteo Richiardi & Roberto Leombruni & Nicole J. Saam & Michele Sonnessa, 2006. "A Common Protocol for Agent-Based Social Simulation," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, pages 1-15.
    5. Brian Sallans & Alexander Pfister & Alexandros Karatzoglou & Georg Dorffner, 2003. "Simulation and Validation of an Integrated Markets Model," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 6(4), pages 1-2.
    6. Johann Peter Murmann & Thomas Brenner, 2003. "The Use of Simulations in Developing Robust Knowledge about Causal Processes: Methodological Considerations and an Application to Industrial Evolution," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 66, Society for Computational Economics.
    7. Schelling, Thomas C, 1969. "Models of Segregation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, pages 488-493.
    8. S. Illeris & G. Akehurst, 2002. "Introduction," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 1-3, January.
    9. J. Gary Polhill & Dawn C. Parker & Daniel Brown & Volker Grimm, 2008. "Using the ODD Protocol for Describing Three Agent-Based Social Simulation Models of Land-Use Change," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 11(2), pages 1-3.
    10. Joshua M. Epstein & Robert L. Axtell, 1996. "Growing Artificial Societies: Social Science from the Bottom Up," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262550253, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2009-58-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Flaminio Squazzoni). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.