Are 'STEM from Mars and SSH from Venus'?: Challenging disciplinary stereotypes of research's social value

Abstract

There is a reasonably settled consensus within the innovation community that science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) research is more 'useful' to societies than other kinds of research notably social sciences, humanities and arts (SSHA). Our paper questions this assumption, and we seek to empirically test whether STEM researchers behave in ways that make their research more useful than SSHA researchers. A critical reading of the discussion around SSHA supports developing a taxonomy of differences: this is tested using a database covering 1,583 researchers from the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC). Results do not support that SSH researchers behave in ways that are less useful than STEM researchers, even if differences are found in the nature of their transfer practices and their research users. The assumption that STEM research is more useful than SSH research needs revision if research policy is to properly focus on research useful for society.

Introducing the dilemma of societal alignment for inclusive and responsible research and innovation

“…Aspects such as a lack of recognition, resources (including time) and the rationale and interests of public and private research funders may therefore impede and shape ongoing relationships. In addition to the societal pressures and entanglements that scientists experience (Olmos-Peñuela, Benneworth, and Castro-Martinez 2014), narrowly defined commercial interests can prevail over societal concerns in research agendas produced by collaborations between public research organisations and the private sector (Bozeman, Fay, and Slade 2013;Fiorina 1999).…”

Knowledge transfer activities in social sciences and humanities: Explaining the interactions of research groups with non-academic agents

“…However, the problem remains that when SSH practices are analysed through lenses built for science and technology fields, the societal contribution of SSH research is not properly captured (Olmos-Peñuela et al, 2013a). This may be due to the characteristics of SSH research and how its outputs reach the public or are exploited by non-academic communities.…”

“…Lack of visibility of the social value of SSH research (Olmos-Peñuela et al, 2013a) and an assumption that these disciplines have fewer links with third parties are prompting efforts to demonstrate its public value (see Bate, 2011 for case studies in the humanities). Research shows that KT in SSH involves a range of partners (firms, government agencies, non-profit organizations) and activities other than technology transfer (Hughes et al, 2011;Olmos-Peñuela et al, 2013a, 2013b.…”

“…Lack of visibility of the social value of SSH research (Olmos-Peñuela et al, 2013a) and an assumption that these disciplines have fewer links with third parties are prompting efforts to demonstrate its public value (see Bate, 2011 for case studies in the humanities). Research shows that KT in SSH involves a range of partners (firms, government agencies, non-profit organizations) and activities other than technology transfer (Hughes et al, 2011;Olmos-Peñuela et al, 2013a, 2013b. The present paper contributes to this discussion by addressing some unexplored aspects of the literature related to the heterogeneity of university-industry interactions: for instance, little is known about the university-industry interface in SSH and studies with an explicit emphasis on the group level are scarce (Gulbrandsen et al, 2011).…”

Preprint for the Humanities - Fiction or a real possibility?

“…Further reading: Akker (2016), Atanassova et al (2015), Briggle et al (2015), Cohen (2016), Dubucs (2009), Niyazov et al (2016, Olmos-Peñuela et al (2014), Parks (2010), Rentier (2016), Sismondo (2016), Zic Fuchs (2014.…”