IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/paitcp/978-3-319-12784-2_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

The Quality of Social Simulation: An Example from Research Policy Modelling

In: Policy Practice and Digital Science

Author

Listed:
  • Petra Ahrweiler

    (EA European Academy of Technology and Innovation Assessment GmbH)

  • Nigel Gilbert

    (University of Surrey)

Abstract

This chapter deals with the assessment of the quality of a simulation. The first section points out the problems of the standard view and the constructivist view in evaluating social simulations. A simulation is good when we get from it what we originally would have liked to get from the target; in this, the evaluation of the simulation is guided by the expectations, anticipations, and experience of the community that uses it. This makes the user community view the most promising mechanism to assess the quality of a policy-modelling exercise. The second section looks at a concrete policy-modelling example to test this idea. It shows that the very first negotiation and discussion with the user community to identify their questions is highly user-driven, interactive, and iterative. It requires communicative skills, patience, willingness to compromise on both sides, and motivation to make the formal world of modellers and the narrative world of practical policy making meet. Often, the user community is involved in providing data for calibrating the model. It is not an easy issue to confirm the existence, quality, and availability of data and check for formats and database requirements. As the quality of the simulation in the eyes of the user will very much depend on the quality of the informing data and the quality of the model calibration, much time and effort need to be spent in coordinating this issue with the user community. Last but not least, the user community has to check the validity of simulation results and has to believe in their quality. Users have to be enabled to understand the model, to agree with its processes and ways to produce results, to judge similarity between empirical and simulated data, etc. Although the user community view might be the most promising, it is the most work-intensive mechanism to assess the quality of a simulation. Summarising, to trust the quality of a simulation means to trust the process that produced its results. This process includes not only the design and construction of the simulation model itself but also the whole interaction between stakeholders, study team, model, and findings. This chapter deals with the assessment of the quality of a simulation. After discussing this issue on a general level, we apply and test the assessment mechanisms using an example from policy modelling.

Suggested Citation

  • Petra Ahrweiler & Nigel Gilbert, 2015. "The Quality of Social Simulation: An Example from Research Policy Modelling," Public Administration and Information Technology, in: Marijn Janssen & Maria A. Wimmer & Ameneh Deljoo (ed.), Policy Practice and Digital Science, edition 127, chapter 3, pages 35-55, Springer.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:paitcp:978-3-319-12784-2_3
    DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-12784-2_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Petra Ahrweiler, 2017. "Agent-based simulation for science, technology, and innovation policy," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 391-415, January.

    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:spr:paitcp:978-3-319-12784-2_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.