For the Sciences They Are A‐Changin’: A Response to Commentaries on Núñez et al.’s (2019) “What Happened to Cognitive Science?”

A recent issue of Topics in Cognitive Science featured 11 thoughtful commentaries responding to our article “What happened to cognitive science?” (Núñez et al., 2019). Here, we identify several themes that arose in those commentaries and respond to each. Crucial to understanding our original article is the fundamental distinction between multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary endeavors: Cognitive science began (and has stayed) as multidisciplinary but has failed to move on to form a cohesive interdisciplinary field. We clarify and elaborate our original argument and reiterate the importance of a data‐driven evaluation of the current status of the field, which exhibits a marked disciplinary imbalance, a lack of a coherent conceptual core, and a striking absence of a consistent curriculum in the institutions that grant degrees in this domain. Half a century after the creation of cognitive science, it may now be a good time to revisit goals and visions for how to best approach the ever‐fascinating scientific study of the mind(s).     

Becoming Cognitive Science

Cognitive science continues to make a compelling case for having a coherent, unique, and fundamental subject of inquiry: What is the nature of minds, where do they come from, and how do they work? Central to this inquiry is the notion of agents that have goals, one of which is their own persistence, who use dynamically constructed knowledge to act in the world to achieve those goals. An agentive perspective explains why a special class of systems have a cluster of co‐occurring capacities that enable them to exhibit adaptive behavior in a complex environment: perception, attention, memory, representation, planning, and communication. As an intellectual endeavor, cognitive science may not have achieved a hard core of uncontested assumptions that Lakatos (1978) identifies as emblematic of a successful research program, but there are alternative conceptions according to which cognitive science has been successful. First, challenges of the early, core tenet of “Mind as Computation” have helped put cognitive science on a stronger foundation—one that incorporates relations between minds and their environments. Second, even if a full cross‐disciplinary theoretic consensus is elusive, cognitive science can inspire distant, deep, and transformative connections between pairs of fields. To be intellectually vital, cognitive science need not resemble a traditional discipline with its associated insularity and unchallenged assumptions. Instead, there is strength and resilience in the diverse perspectives and methods that cognitive science assembles together. This interdisciplinary enterprise is fragile and perhaps inherently unstable, as the looming absorption of cognitive science into psychology shows. Still, for many researchers, the excitement and benefits of triangulating on the nature of minds by integrating diverse cases cannot be secured by a stable discipline with an uncontested core of assumptions.     

重大科技成果科学知识传承研究

从科学知识的双重属性出发,对科学知识传承的概念进行了辨析。结合生物进化对重大科技成果科学知识传承研究的启示,重点探讨了重大科技成果科学知识传承研究的主要内容、方法,以期丰富已有重大科技成果的理论和方法论研究内容,为进一步探索重大科技成果的发展规律打下基础。     

时间治疗学的计量研究

以《中国生物医学文献光盘数据库》(CBM)、《中文生物医学期刊文献数据库》(CMCC)和 OVID为数据源 ,全面检索时间治疗学的文献信息 ,利用文献管理软件 Pro Cite5辅助以手工方法对获取的信息进行管理和计量分析 ,以纳入文献的年代、期刊、著者、主题、国别和机构分布等科学和文献计量学指标全面揭示和评价时间治疗学的研究现状和发展趋势。研究结果显示 :时间治疗学的中文文献 91篇 ,分布于 73种期刊中 ,主题分布于中医学、心血管系统疾病、肿瘤、哮喘、消化性溃疡、糖尿病和时间治疗学总论等方面 ;同时纳入来自 35个国家和地区的有关外文文献 4 80篇 ,主要数据来源于 EMBASE和 MEDL INE,分布于 2 85种期刊中 ,收录时间治疗学文献 5篇以上的期刊有 14种 ,著者包括 12位 ,收录时间治疗学文献前 11名的机构分别为鲍尔勃罗斯医院、德州大学、康涅狄格州医学院、日本自治医学院、明尼苏达大学等。有关时间治疗学的研究 ,国内尚处于临床应用初期 ,国外已经形成核心著者、核心期刊和核心研究机构 ,主要分布在欧美等发达国家 ,已经在多个方面取得成绩。     

基于科学计量学方法的前交叉韧带损伤预防生物力学研究

目的分析前交叉韧带(anterior cruciate ligament,ACL)损伤预防的生物力学研究现状、主题及特征,对促进ACL损伤预防及控制具有实际指导意义。方法利用Web of Science、中国知网等数据库,运用科学计量学方法对ACL损伤预防的生物力学研究进行统计分析。结果 ACL损伤预防生物力学研究的逐年累积发文量在总体上较好服从指数增长规律,主要集中在体育科学、矫形学、外科、康复学等学科方向。参与研究的国家中美国位列第一,参与研究的作者中Timothy E.Hewett发文量最大。ACL损伤的生物力学研究主题共分成危险因素及发生率、女性ACL损伤、神经肌肉训练与控制、ACL损伤评估4个类团。结论科研人员需拓宽自己的研究领域,利用国家、地方政府在康复医疗事业引领作用,不断加大生物力学在ACL损伤预防研究的力度。     

Contribution of women authors in French medical journals from 1983 to 2019

PurposeDespite the feminization of the medical profession, the academic world remains largely male-dominated. Several studies conducted in the English-speaking world have shown that women are published less than men. Our goal is to define the evolution of the role of women in five French medical journals.Materials and methodsThe articles from five French journals (Revue du Praticien, Bulletin du Cancer, Exercer, Presse Médicale, Cancer/Radiothérapie) published in February between 1983 and 2019 were included. We selected twelve years from that period of time. The analysis was completed using Cochran-Armitage tests with a significance level of < 0,05. Among the authors, 4397 were included in total and we were able to determine the gender of 4309 of them.ResultsThe percentage of female authors went from 16% in 1983 to 36.4% in 2019 (p < 0.001). This rise is more significant for those specializing in surgery than for those specializing in medicine, with a percentage going from 14% to 38.5% (p < 0.001) against 16.8% to 35.4% (p < 0.001) respectively. In 2019, women still only represent 30.2% of the last authors, 27.6% of editorial authors and 30.6% of corresponding authors.ConclusionOur study underlines a significant increase in the number of female authors and highlights that their position as authors remains on the margins of the most prestigious authorial positions. While we can celebrate this increase, we nevertheless notice that there are fewer female authors than female practitioners.     

2013—2017年我国全科医学领域中青年作者论文影响力评价研究

背景　20世纪80年代末,全科医学的概念引入我国大陆地区。我国全科医学起步较晚,目前关于全科医学论文成果的系统性研究也相对较少。目的　本研究以2013—2017年我国全科医学领域的科研论文作为切入点,对中青年作者发表论文的影响力及高影响力论文的特征进行分析,深入了解我国全科医学领域的科研论文产出及影响力情况,以期为今后全科医学的科学研究和学科发展提供参考依据。方法　本研究依照研究数据检索与采集、评价指标体系构建、定量评价、定性评价、综合评价等程序进行。于2018年7月,使用Web of Science平台的SCI数据库、万方数据库中全科医学领域的论文。检索策略主要依据全科医学领域的常见关键词构建检索式获得该领域主要论文,并将国内外全科医学/家庭医学/初级卫生保健领域及相关学术期刊发表的论文纳入作为补充,同时纳入作者单位为全科医学/疗科、全科医学系、社区卫生服务中心/站/社康中心、全科医学教研室/研究所等全科医学机构的论文。检索时间窗口限定为2013—2017年;论文类型限定为学术性论文（article）和综述评论性论文（review）。在查阅参考文献、专家咨询的基础上,构建论文影响力评价指标体系,设影响力水平、创新水平2项一级指标及附加项;采用层次分析法确定指标权重。按照发表年遴选年度被引频次较高的论文（被引频次居前30%的外文论文、被引频次居前2%的中文论文）进行定量、定性及综合评价。结果　2013—2017年,SCI收录国内外全科医学领域论文20 046篇,以发表文献的第一作者第一机构统计,我国作者作为第一作者共发表文献323篇（1.6%）;万方数据库收录国内全科医学领域论文15 553篇。根据论文的综合评价得分,共获得2013—2017年全科医学领域中青年作者高影响力论文90篇。90篇高影响力论文中,关键词以“高血压”出现频次最高（16次）;其余出现频次≥10次的关键词包括初级卫生保健、糖尿病、老年人等;第一作者的第一机构主要是高校非全科医学系〔34篇（37.8%）〕,其次是综合医院非全科医学/疗科〔16篇（17.8%）〕;大陆地区中,第一作者的第一单位地域以东部地区为主〔49篇（70.0%）〕;大部分论文有基金项目资助支持〔64篇（71.1%）〕,以市区级基金项目居多〔24篇（26.7%）〕。结论　我国全科医学领域中发表高影响力论文的中青年学者的研究方向契合学科研究热点;高校非全科医学系、综合医院非全科医学/疗科的学者积极参与全科医学的科学研究活动,促进了全科医学学科的发展。目前我国全科医学领域研究规模相对较小,我国香港地区全科医学研究开展较早,应加强我国大陆地区与港澳台地区的学术交流合作。为进一步提升全科医学学科建设,建议优化学术资源结构,加强对科研人员的培训,重点是高校全科医学系、综合医院全科医学/疗科、社区卫生服务机构等群体;增加对全科医学研究的基金项目投入;培育学科精品期刊,以提升我国全科医学领域的整体科研水平,深入推动我国全科医学学科的建设与发展。