Talk:Computational sociology

Actors and social change agents are of key importance. Roles, functions and even methods apply to social computation. (Any well formed term pair works either way IMO). Using object methods ( i.e. a totally neutral stance outside of the model) sociologists can observe without effecting the test case... or so it is presumed. Actually as in physics, no observation can be 100% removed from that which is observed. If this is even remotely true for elementary particles then how much more so of Human Beings?

The Unified Modeling Language has elaborate constructs to deal with such entity relationships as manager/worker, buyer/seller, lawyer/client, teacher/student and heaven forbid even master/slave. In the one-to-one world those relationships are fairly urbane. Certainly, they have been used in many 'data warehouse metamodels' and other 'object-oriented' database schemes. But Human Beans are not objects! They are Actors, agents or heaven again forbid subjects.

But what of say, the relationship between a local law enforcement group and a street gang. How do you squeeze this use case into a meaningful model? Now you have complex one-to-many, many-to-one, many-to-many dynamic heirarchies - relationships that will do their best to defy all standards, definitions, conventions, procedures, methods and everything else you throw at them. Yes Computational Sociology is a science of enormous complexity.

---

The first reference to "Simulation for the Social Scientist" (2nd ed.) refers to the title as an "on-line book". It's not. It's just an order form for a print book, though with some useful links to free software.

Adding academic links

I have added some academic links including department and centers that support related research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atom888 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Is this an encyclopedia article or a promotional pamphlet

This article reads too much like a promotional pamphlet. It is one thing to say "here is Computational Sociology, it is a branch of social science focusing on x and using y believing in z" and quite another to tell a story about how all social scientific progress to date using a computer led to the practices and approaches now used in this field. This sounds a lot like saying all the other fields miss the "truth boat" and is nonsense. Some of the discussion here would be better suited for a computational sociology society board of directors meeting for editing their website. 32TWMV 14 November 2018 —Preceding undated comment added 12:12, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

About the reference to the Club of Rome report

There's a reference to that report used to demonstrate the credibility of this kind of approach and why the focus shifted on micro simulations. It should be noted however, and it's less known, that the report proved to be very accurate indeed! The proof to that is the sequel published 30 years afterwards called "Limits to Growth: the 30-year update"

see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Limits_to_Growth — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.169.55.245 (talk) 21:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

G'day, Good Robot Overlord .... um .... about your revert ....

Hi Materialscientist - I set the lede up for transclusion, but STiki didn't like it. If you don't mind too much, would you please ask STiki what I did wrong? And please do let STiki know I am very grateful for the WP:AGF. - Their Humble Servant; LeoRomero (talk) 23:43, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Computational_sociology&type=revision&diff=693797001&oldid=693794667

Adding more information on Computational Sociology

The article does state the motivation behind Computational Sociology and also adds the History details quite comprehensively. However, there is not much in the article that can shed more light into the topic. I feel there can be new sections which talk about the latest trends, the current updates, the challenges, new opportunities etc. This will ensure that the article will be more informative and would be able to address a wider information need on the topic. Right now, if a person comes to the page, he/she would just be able to get a brief overview and history which may not be enough.

I believe the paper “Manifesto of computational social science” by Conte,Rosaria et al. would help in creating all the missing sections and improving the article. The paper does highlight topics like emerging trends, current implementation, challenges in Computational Sociology etc. It is also a paper from 2012, which is recent enough for our purposes. LijuGeorge (talk) 21:40, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

LijuGeorge, your suggested article is an appropriate and relevant article to cite here; however, first of all make sure, you integrate the article appropriately here using your own wordings of the article and also to make sure that the article here is not dominated by information from just one external source. Thanks Rostaf (talk) 01:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello LijuGeorge,

This would be a great addition to the article. There is very little additional structure to the article, which only includes history right now. When I was first navigating through through the page, I realized that there was a lack of information that could be very informative in the field that your proposal would bring to the table. Your proposal to add more current information in the field is also very beneficial, being that the most recent part of the history section was from 2008, and there has been much advancement in this field since then. The content you propose to add so far seems like it will make the article more content rich, and up to date, and should surely enhance the article and make it a better experience for the readers. Jshankroff (talk) 23:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

References

Proposal to add background section

This article is quite informative, but lacks key elements that would make this article more effective. To make the article more effective, I suggest the addition of a brief 250-500 word background section of the topic before going straight into the history component. Additionally, I will add at least one external source to provide support, which will be extracted from professional papers and articles in the field. This background section will give readers a better understanding of how the topic was introduced and some important general information about Computational Sociology. The structure of the article will be strengthened with the addition of a background because there are only two major sections to this topic, which are the lead section and the history section. This background section will be written using a more mellow language that will be easier to read for the reader since the majority of the article is written using advanced language and terminology that makes the reader have to use external links and sources to understand the content.

The reference that will support the background of this page, is an article by Mauricio Salgado and Nigel Gilbert called “Emergence and communication in computational sociology.” This article touches upon the emergence and importance of this topic within the last half century and it’s impact. They also provide additional information and theories that can support Computational Sociology. Jshankroff (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jshankroff! Your suggested article is a great choice! Please go ahead with that Rostaf (talk) 01:02, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello Jshankroff,

That is definitely a good idea. I can relate to what you mentioned. When I first came to the page, I found it difficult to get a context on the topic as the article assumes that a reader already has a good understanding of Computational Sociology and its related topics. The lead section, even though informative for an initiated user, would not be able to provide every other audience an initial background of Computational Sociology and a context to explore the other sections. I hope the section that you suggest to add would address these issues and help a user to stay motivated on the topic.

I have also viewed the paper that you are using to support the background section and agree that it would help add relevant content.

Looking forward to it. LijuGeorge (talk) 13:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Computational sociology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100611121626/http://www.ccsr.uiuc.edu/web/Journals/Journals.html to http://www.ccsr.uiuc.edu/web/Journals/Journals.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100611091342/http://www.ccsr.uiuc.edu/web/Groups/Groups.html to http://www.ccsr.uiuc.edu/web/Groups/Groups.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031223051008/http://www.casos.cs.cmu.edu/education/phd/phd_casos.html to http://www.casos.cs.cmu.edu/education/phd/phd_casos.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20121215023745/http://hcs.ucla.edu/courses.htm to http://hcs.ucla.edu/courses.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110430200327/http://www.ccsr.uiuc.edu/ to http://www.ccsr.uiuc.edu/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130425014018/http://dl.ucd.ie/ to http://dl.ucd.ie/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:32, 11 August 2017 (UTC)