IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/jas/jasssj/2011-60-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modelling Theory Communities in Science

Author

Abstract

This position paper presents a framework for modelling theory communities where theories interact as agents in a conceptual network. It starts with introducing the difficulties in integrating scientific theories by discussing some recent approaches, especially of structuralist theory of science. Theories might differ in reference, extension, scope, objectives, functions, architecture, language etc. To address these potential integration barriers, the paper employs a broad definition of "scientific theory", where a theory is a more or less complex description a describer puts forward in a context called science with the aim of making sense of the world. This definition opens up the agency dimension of theories: theories "do" something. They work on a - however ontologically interpreted - subject matter. They describe something, and most of them claim that their descriptions of this "something" are superior to those of others. For modelling purposes, the paper makes use of such description behaviour of scientific theories on two levels. The first is the level where theories describe the world in their terms. The second is a sub-case of the first: theories can of course describe the description behaviour of other theories concerning this world and compare with own description behaviour. From here, interaction and potential cooperation between theories could be potentially identified by each theory perspective individually. Generating inclusive theory communities and simulating their dynamics using an agent-based model means to implement theories as agents; to create an environment where the agents work as autonomous entities in a self-constituted universe of discourse; to observe what they do with this environment (they will try to apply their concepts, and instantiate their mechanisms of sense-making); and to let them mutually describe and analyse their behaviour and suggest areas for interaction. Some mechanisms for compatibility testing are discussed and the prototype of the model with preliminary applications is introduced.

Suggested Citation

  • Petra Ahrweiler, 2011. "Modelling Theory Communities in Science," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-8.
    • Handle: RePEc:jas:jasssj:2011-60-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jasss.org/14/4/8/8.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. N. Gilbert, 1997. "A Simulation of the Structure of Academic Science," Sociological Research Online, , vol. 2(2), pages 91-105, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "Can intellectual processes in the sciences also be simulated? The anticipation and visualization of possible future states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2197-2214, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carayol, Nicolas & Dalle, Jean-Michel, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 167-191, June.
    2. Loet Leydesdorff, 2015. "Can intellectual processes in the sciences also be simulated? The anticipation and visualization of possible future states," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2197-2214, December.
    3. David O'Sullivan & Mordechai Haklay, 2000. "Agent-Based Models and Individualism: Is the World Agent-Based?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(8), pages 1409-1425, August.
    4. Michel Zitt, 2015. "Meso-level retrieval: IR-bibliometrics interplay and hybrid citation-words methods in scientific fields delineation," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2223-2245, March.
    5. Heshmati, Almas & Lenz-Cesar, Flávio, 2013. "Determinants and Policy Simulation of Firms Cooperation in Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 7487, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Isaac Naveh & Ron Sun, 2006. "A cognitively based simulation of academic science," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 313-337, December.
    7. Mario Paolucci & Francisco Grimaldo, 2014. "Mechanism change in a simulation of peer review: from junk support to elitism," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 99(3), pages 663-688, June.
    8. Matthias Meyer & Iris Lorscheid & Klaus G. Troitzsch, 2009. "The Development of Social Simulation as Reflected in the First Ten Years of JASSS: a Citation and Co-Citation Analysis," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 12(4), pages 1-12.
    9. Francisco Grimaldo & Mario Paolucci & Jordi Sabater-Mir, 2018. "Reputation or peer review? The role of outliers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 1421-1438, September.
    10. Matthias Meyer, 2011. "Bibliometrics, Stylized Facts and the Way Ahead: How to Build Good Social Simulation Models of Science?," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 14(4), pages 1-4.
    11. M. Laura Frigotto & Massimo Riccaboni, 2011. "A few special cases: scientific creativity and network dynamics in the field of rare diseases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 397-420, October.
    12. Simone Righi & Károly Takács, 2017. "The miracle of peer review and development in science: an agent-based model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 587-607, October.
    13. Pawel Sobkowicz, 2011. "Simulations of opinion changes in scientific communities," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(2), pages 233-250, May.
    14. Gilbert, Nigel & Ahrweiler, Petra & Pyka, Andreas, 2007. "Learning in innovation networks: Some simulation experiments," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 378(1), pages 100-109.
    15. Flavio Lenz-Cesar & Almas Heshmati, 2010. "Agent-based Simulation of Cooperative Innovation," TEMEP Discussion Papers 201052, Seoul National University; Technology Management, Economics, and Policy Program (TEMEP), revised Jan 2010.
    16. Matthias Meyer & Michael A. Zaggl & Kathleen M. Carley, 2011. "Measuring CMOT’s intellectual structure and its development," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 1-34, March.
    17. Andreas Pyka & Nigel Gilbert & Petra Ahrweiler, 2006. "Simulating Knowledge-Generation and -Distribution Processes in Innovation Collaborations and Networks," Discussion Paper Series 287, Universitaet Augsburg, Institute for Economics.
    18. Petra Ahrweiler & Andreas Pyka & Nigel Gilbert, 2004. "Simulating Knowledge Dynamics In Innovation Networks (Skin)," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Roberto Leombruni & Matteo Richiardi (ed.), Industry And Labor Dynamics The Agent-Based Computational Economics Approach, chapter 14, pages 284-296, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Jeffrey O’Neal London & Nasir Jamil Sheikh, 2020. "Innovation in African-American high-tech enterprises: a multi-agent approach," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 7(4), pages 3101-3121, June.
    20. David Chavalarias, 2017. "What’s wrong with Science?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 481-503, 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:jas:jasssj:2011-60-1. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Francesco Renzini (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.