The answer for the kind of panicked flurry in reasoning we’re seeing during the COVID-19 pandemic may lie in a field of critical thinking called vice epistemology. This theory argues our thinking habits and intellectual character traits cause poor reasoning.
Staying socially connected in times of threat has benefits beyond helping us manage our mental well-being. Other people can provide us with practical support, like picking up groceries or passing on relevant information, as well as emotional support. This feeling is called social solidarity, and if we get it right we’ll be much better equipped to respond to this and other crises.
Michael Quinn Patton, a giant in the field of evaluation, has been getting queries from colleagues young and old, novice evaluators and long-time practitioners, asking how he’s making sense of the global health emergency and what I think the implications may be for evaluation. Her’s his take on where we are and what it means.
Research explains the relatively late behavioral reaction to the information of COVID-19 in Europe, writes Joan Costa-Font
Social science, argues Michael Taster of the LSE Impact blog, has an important role to play, by directly contributing to policy surrounding COVID-19 and its impacts, but also by acting as a critical friend, which raises the urgent question: how can this wealth of knowledge and expertise best be communicated?
Psychological scientists at the University of Washington’s Center for the Science of Social Connection draw from their clinical and research experiences help us understand the side effects of social distancing and suggest strategies for addressing them.
Although feeling anxiety in response to a threat is a normal human reaction, sustained high anxiety can undermine constructive responses to the crisis. The following suggestions, based on psychological science, can help you deal with coronavirus anxiety.
Instead of viewing rumors and myths as misperceptions that can be suppressed with accurate information, we should treat them as opportunities to understand — and respond to — the legitimate anxieties of the people who adopt and share them. In other words, we should look at them as valuable feedback that can help improve our own reporting and messaging.
Drawing on discussions with academics who have oriented their work around public engagement and social impact, Daniel Pearson suggests these academics present an opportunity to rethink the existing structures of reward and recognition in higher education. “We are, as a species, addicted to story,” says English professor Jonathan Gottschall in his book, The Storytelling Animal. “Even when the […] Tom Burns, whose combination of play — and plays – with teaching in higher education added a light, collaborative and engaging model […] A 2024 report by the National Academies explores the latest advances in artificial intelligence (AI) technology and their potential effects on economic productivity, job stability, and income inequality. It also highlights key research opportunities and data needs to help workers and policymakers adapt to the evolving AI landscape. In this post, co-authors Frank T. Piller, Tucker J. Marion, and Mahdi Srour reflect on the inspiration behind their research article, “Generative […] During the final stages of editing the proofs for Artificial Intelligence and Work: Transforming Work, Organizations, and Society in an Age of Insecurity, […]
EXPLORE
Impact
Young Scholars Can’t Take the Field in Game of Academic Metrics
READ MORE
Canada’s Storytellers Challenge Seeks Compelling Narratives About Student Research
READ MORE
Tom Burns, 1959-2024: A Pioneer in Learning Development
READ MORE
Innovation
NAS Report Examines Nexus of AI and Workplace
READ MORE
When Do You Need to Trust a GenAI’s Input to Your Innovation Process?
READ MORE
The Authors of ‘Artificial Intelligence and Work’ on Future Risk
READ MORE
