This article is part of a series by the Smithsonian Photography Initiative called Click! Photography Changes Everything. This article discusses how photography and increased visibility can bridge the gap between the natural world and human interaction.
This presentation is part of the faculty lecture series UNT Speaks Out on the Food We Eat. The topics include what processed food is, genetically-modified foods, functional foods, and the impacts of processed foods.
Article on the relations between science and policy offering an analysis of the historical antecedents of the policy of science and comparative data and ethical reflections on the policy of scientific budget.
This presentation is part of the faculty lecture series UNT Speaks Out on Gas Well Drilling Redux. This presentation discusses the 'not in my back yard' (NIMBY) attitude - opposition by residents to a proposal for new development that is close to their homes - and focus on whether is it principled or hypocritical to simultaneously oppose the development while benefiting economically from it.
This book chapter discusses media and communication. As core features of humanity, communication and media clearly predate academic disciplines. They are in this sense non-disciplinary. Yet, they have for centuries been the subject of inquiry by those concerned to understand and improve human correspondence. This chapter surveys the historical development and present form of multi-, inter-, and transdisciplinary studies of media and communication.
In this paper, the author discusses whether open access threatens peer review, as implied by the Association of American Publishers in their endorsement of the Research Works Act. The author suggests that we need to experiment with new models of peer evaluation.
This paper discusses the University of North Texas' (UNT) Center for the Study of Interdisciplinarity (CSID), where philosophers continue to examine the value of knowledge. The authors also discuss one example of CSID's work with the Comparative Assessment of Peer Review (CAPR) project. CAPR is a four-year project (2008-2012) studying the changing nature of peer review processes across six U.S. and foreign public science agencies. CAPR is funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation's (NSF) Science of Science and Innovation Policy (SciSIP) program.
This report is on the workshop 'Transformative Research: Ethical and Societal Implications'. Workshop conversations cluster under the four headings of the history and definitions, promotion, evaluation, and integration of transformative research.
This is the report of a workshop focusing on the use of broader societal impacts criteria as part of the review process at the European Commission. There is both a historical account and some thinking about how 'impact' ought to be incorporated into Horizon 2020 (the funding scheme formerly known as FP8). Since the US NSF is also currently rethinking the details of its merit review process, and since there is an interesting comparison between NSF's and the EC's approaches to impact, the authors have also included a focus on NSF's Broader Impacts Criterion. The workshop was both a research opportunity (under SciSIP grant #0830387) and an effort to use that research to help inform policy for science (in terms of informing peer review models).
Article describing changes in the U.S. National Science Foundation's (NSF) merit review criteria. The authors argue that scientists are more likely to preserve their autonomy by embracing - or 'owning' - the new Broader Impacts Criterion rather than resisting it.