Redefining Science: The Impact of Complexity on Theory Development in Social and Behavioral Research

Disciplinary differences in the development of scientific generalizations and explanations are reviewed in this article. The social and behavioral sciences have identified fewer laws, established fewer "paradigms," and developed "worse" theories than the physical sciences. We argue that the variability in the theoretical attainments of disciplines is due primarily to differences in the complexity of the topics studied. Accounts suggesting that differences in the maturity of disciplines are responsible for the variability are dismissed. In the study of complex phenomena, there is an extreme trade-off between generality and precision in which basic theories do not make the precise predictions needed for the development of applications and in which applied models are lacking in generality. The examination of proximal determinants and the generation of context-specific mathematical models are essential for prediction and application in complex disciplines. The impossibility of developing exacting theories of complex phenomena suggests that we need to redefine our conceptions of "good" and "bad" theories and "real" and "fake" science.

Dynamic combinatorial/covalent chemistry: a tool to read, generate and modulate the bioactivity of compounds and compound mixtures

Reversible covalent bond formation under thermodynamic control adds reactivity to self-assembled supramolecular systems, and is therefore an ideal tool to assess complexity of chemical and biological systems. Dynamic combinatorial/covalent chemistry (DCC) has been used to read structural information by selectively assembling receptors with the optimum molecular fit around a given template from a mixture of reversibly reacting building blocks. This technique allows access to efficient sensing devices and the generation of new biomolecules, such as small molecule receptor binders for drug discovery, but also larger biomimetic polymers and macromolecules with particular three-dimensional structural architectures. Adding a kinetic factor to a thermodynamically controlled equilibrium results in dynamic resolution and in self-sorting and self-replicating systems, all of which are of major importance in biological systems. Furthermore, the temporary modification of bioactive compounds by reversible combinatorial/covalent derivatisation allows control of their release and facilitates their transport across amphiphilic self-assembled systems such as artificial membranes or cell walls. The goal of this review is to give a conceptual overview of how the impact of DCC on supramolecular assemblies at different levels can allow us to understand, predict and modulate the complexity of biological systems.

Bibliometric Evidence for a Hierarchy of the Sciences

The hypothesis of a Hierarchy of the Sciences, first formulated in the 19(th) century, predicts that, moving from simple and general phenomena (e.g. particle dynamics) to complex and particular (e.g. human behaviour), researchers lose ability to reach theoretical and methodological consensus. This hypothesis places each field of research along a continuum of complexity and "softness", with profound implications for our understanding of scientific knowledge. Today, however, the idea is still unproven and philosophically overlooked, too often confused with simplistic dichotomies that contrast natural and social sciences, or science and the humanities. Empirical tests of the hypothesis have usually compared few fields and this, combined with other limitations, makes their results contradictory and inconclusive. We verified whether discipline characteristics reflect a hierarchy, a dichotomy or neither, by sampling nearly 29,000 papers published contemporaneously in 12 disciplines and measuring a set of parameters hypothesised to reflect theoretical and methodological consensus. The biological sciences had in most cases intermediate values between the physical and the social, with bio-molecular disciplines appearing harder than zoology, botany or ecology. In multivariable analyses, most of these parameters were independent predictors of the hierarchy, even when mathematics and the humanities were included. These results support a "gradualist" view of scientific knowledge, suggesting that the Hierarchy of the Sciences provides the best rational framework to understand disciplines' diversity. A deeper grasp of the relationship between subject matter's complexity and consensus could have profound implications for how we interpret, publish, popularize and administer scientific research.

Eliminating the mystery from the concept of emergence

While some branches of complexity theory are advancing rapidly, the same cannot be said for our understanding of emergence. Despite a complete knowledge of the rules underlying the interactions between the parts of many systems, we are often baffled by their sudden transitions from simple to complex. Here I propose a solution to this conceptual problem. Given that emergence is often the result of many interactions occurring simultaneously in time and space, an ability to intuitively grasp it would require the ability to consciously think in parallel. A simple exercise is used to demonstrate that we do not possess this ability. Our surprise at the behaviour of cellular automata models, and the natural cases of pattern formation they mimic, is then explained from this perspective. This work suggests that the cognitive limitations of the mind can be as significant a barrier to scientific progress as the limitations of our senses.