In this paper, we argue for a stronger engagement between concepts in affective and social neuroscience on the one hand, and theories from the fields of anthropology, economics, political science, and sociology on the other. Affective and social neuroscience could provide an additional assessment of social theories. We argue that some of the most influential social theories of the last four decades—rational choice theory, behavioral economics, and post-structuralism—contain assumptions that are inconsistent with key findings in affective and social neuroscience. We also show that another approach from the social sciences—plural rationality theory—shows greater compatibility with these findings. We further claim that, in their turn, social theories can strengthen affective and social neuroscience. The former can provide more precise formulations of the social phenomena that neuroscientific models have targeted, can help neuroscientists who build these models become more aware of their social and cultural biases, and can even improve the models themselves. To illustrate, we show how plural rationality theory can be used to further specify and test the somatic marker hypothesis. Thus, we aim to accelerate the much-needed merger of social theories with affective and social neuroscience.
Objective: To quantify the prevalence of known health‐related risk factors for severe COVID‐19 illness among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults, and their relationship with social determinants. Methods: Weighted cross‐sectional analysis of the 2018‐19 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Survey; Odds Ratios for cumulative risk count category (0, 1, or ≥2 health‐related risk factors) by social factors calculated using ordered logistic regression. Results: Of the adult population, 42.9%(95%CI:40.6,45.2) had none of the examined health‐related risk factors; 38.9%(36.6,41.1) had 1, and 18.2%(16.7,19.7) had ≥2. Adults experiencing relative advantage across social indicators had significantly lower cumulative risk counts, with 30‐70% lower odds of being in a higher risk category. Conclusions: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must continue to be recognised as a priority population in all stages of pandemic preparedness and response as they have disproportionate exposure to social factors associated with risk of severe COVID‐19 illness. Indigeneity itself is not a ‘risk’ factor and must be viewed in the wider context of inequities that impact health Implications for public health: Multi‐sectoral responses are required to improve health during and after the COVID‐19 pandemic that: enable self‐determination; improve incomes, safety, food security and culturally‐safe healthcare; and address discrimination and trauma.
In the health arena, open innovation approaches strive to address real-world complexity through driving multi-stakeholder collaborative activities that can better identify and respond to complex health needs. This paper will argue for the value of an open ecosystem innovation approach, one that explores the full implications of what it means to be "open" in a health innovation context. To these ends, the paper will outline the origins of open innovation in the health arena, suggesting that it has become an important site for pushing the limits of open methods and challenging mainstream conceptions of the targets of health innovation. Five guiding principles for open ecosystem innovation will then be proposed, drawing on learning from the Knowledge Exchange Hubs for the Creative Economy funded by the UK's Arts and Humanities Research Council. These principles point to a configuration of open activities that are maximally sensitive to (1) knowledge diversity in innovation work; (2) the consequences of adopting an open-orientation across all stages of innovation programming; (3) the value of deepening and broadening the targets of innovation activity; (4) the role of mediation in supporting cross-sector partnerships; and, (5) the importance of operating in an adaptive and sustainable manner in the long-term. A follow-on project from the AHRC Hubs-Dementia Connect-sought to apply this learning to an important health focus: dementia and the role played by creative participation in delivering important health outcomes. Through Dementia Connect, the applicability of open ecosystem innovation thinking was assessed, revealing the conditions under which it might deliver innovation-led improvements to the quality of life for those living with a dementia diagnosis. A detailed blueprint for conducting open ecosystem innovation is then proposed in full-a new and comprehensive response to the complex reality of living with a dementia diagnosis today.
Pessoa's (2013) arguments imply that various leading approaches in the social sciences have not adequately conceptualized how emotion and cognition influence human decision making and social behavior. This is particularly unfortunate, as these approaches have been central to the efforts to build bridges between neuroscience and the social sciences. We argue that it would be better to base these efforts on other social theories that appear more compatible with Pessoa's analysis of the brain.
For many living in rural areas, the loss of traditional community assets and increased social fragmentation are a common feature of everyday life. The empty village church is a poignant symbol of these challenges; yet, these are sites that hold considerable potential for new placemaking solutions that respond to the needs of communities today. This means looking beyond “the traditional village church” to recognise a longer history of church adaptation and resilience within the lives of communities. In this paper we ask: how can co-design, projected through a Wicked problems and Clumsy solutions lens, help imagine new futures for communities and their historic churches today? Clumsy solutions consider a plurality of different perspectives on the nature of problems and their resolution to deliver more effective solutions with broad appeal. In the search for clumsiness, we turn to ‘long history’ and ‘slow technology’ for inspiration, uncovering deeper resonance with historical communities of place and anchoring that continuity within church sites themselves. Our paper demonstrates how Wicked/Clumsy thinking can account for the challenges faced by rural communities today, bootstrap co-design activities in the development of clumsy solutions, and uncover clumsiness in long history and slow technology dimensions—together laying the foundation for new placemaking strategies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.