Why federally funded social science research matters
UC Irvine social scientists weigh in

Give us an overview of your federally funded research. What problem are you addressing, and what impact do you hope your work will have?

We take for granted our ability to communicate using language because it comes so naturally to most of us—indeed, most kids are talking even before they are capable of ditching their diapers. Yet millions of Americans struggle to speak and understand language—a condition called aphasia—as a result of abnormal brain development, brain injury (for example, stroke), and neurodegeneration (including progressive aphasia, Alzheimer’s disease, and Parkinson’s disease). This has a profound impact on quality of life because it creates a cruel isolation from an individual’s social and cultural world. My research, which is funded by both the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes of Health, aims to understand how the human brain enables communication through language and how to diagnose the problem when the system fails. The ultimate goal is to reconnect people with aphasia and related disorders to the human experience.

How has federal funding enabled you to pursue this research in ways that might not have been possible otherwise?

Our natural gift of gab belies its complexity. Although much progress has been made, we still don’t fully understand how we carry out even the simplest of linguistic tasks, such as speaking just a single word. These limits to our understanding translate to difficulty pinpointing the problem in people with speech and language deficits, which limits our ability to identify effective treatments. What’s needed is the application of basic science to the problem: research aimed at understanding how the normal system works in the first place. That is mostly what I do. The problem with such research is it’s a hard sell to donors or private foundations, who want to see their money go toward a cure, now, not the promise of a potential cure in the future. Federal funding has long supported basic research, which lays the foundation of knowledge for future progress towards cures for disease or other kinds of advances that affect daily life.

What are some real-world applications or policy implications of your research?

My research on the basic science of brain organization of speech and language has led to improved assessment tools, more accurate diagnoses, and new therapeutic investigations. It is also regularly used in pre-surgical planning for patients undergoing brain surgery and it is starting to inform the development of neural prostheses, artificial devices implanted in the brain that can partially restore lost function.

Why do you think federal investment in social science research is essential for addressing national and global challenges?

Federal investment in social science research, including neuroscience and language science, is essential because it drives fundamental discoveries that can have wide-ranging and often unanticipated impacts. For example, the origins of modern-day AI technologies originated decades ago in basic science research trying to figure out how neural networks can learn. Who would have guessed that someday those early investigations would put a world of information at our fingertips. The social sciences investigate one of the most important topics imaginable: us and social world we are immersed in! The potential payoff of federal investment in the social sciences are literally unimaginable.

What would you say to those who question the value of funding social science research with taxpayer dollars?

It’s like questioning whether you should build a foundation under your house.

Give us an overview of your federally funded research. What problem are you addressing, and what impact do you hope your work will have?

We are developing new ways of predicting age-related memory decline, with the long-term goal of identifying new, early, indicators of major aging disorders like Alzheimer’s and related dementias. Most existing measures of memory decline examine recognition memory, or the ability to say whether or not you have seen something, usually a picture, before. While these have been useful, most scientists don’t think that this is what memory is really “for.” Instead, the emerging consensus is that memory is useful for guiding behavior—for making sense of the present and imagining the future. So we have developed some new experimental measures that specifically isolate memory’s role in making decisions, and which are sensitive enough to see how the use of memory for decisions changes across the lifespan.

How has federal funding enabled you to pursue this research in ways that might not have been possible otherwise?

Simply put, this work could not have been done without federal funding. In order to understand how our measures relate to brain health, we use functional and structural neuroimaging. Neuroimaging studies cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, including things like the costs of running the high-field magnet we use to take pictures of brain, and the salaries of highly skilled technical experts that can operate the magnet and analyze the data it produces. Without this funding, we would have to wait for people to develop Alzheimer’s or related dementias, years or decades after we run our behavioral experiments.

What are some real-world applications or policy implications of your research?

In the long run, the kinds of experiments we are doing could potentially lead to inexpensive early detection of Alzheimer’s and related dementias: Imagine just playing a half hour video game, at home, and getting results that can tell you how your memory performance is shaping up against your own previous results and also others in your demographic. This kind of early warning signal can be immensely important for treatment and care planning, reducing the burdens faced by individuals and families.

Why do you think federal investment in social science research is essential for addressing national and global challenges?

No entity other than the federal government has the size or perspective necessary to fund this kind of high-risk, high-reward research; and certainly not without narrowing its scope by demanding near-term applications. The NIH has a $45 billion budget “every year”, dwarfing even the largest private philanthropists. Private companies need to project a profit on research within just a few years, whereas the federal government has the opportunity to take risks that can benefit billions of people far down the line.

What would you say to those who question the value of funding social science research with taxpayer dollars?

Take a hard look at the facts. Anyone who argues that federal funding of basic research is not absolutely essential is trying to sell you something or has already bought it themselves. This is not a question of cost efficiency, it’s an ideological crusade.

Give us an overview of your federally funded research. What problem are you addressing, and what impact do you hope your work will have?

My research project explains how local governments in China react to foreign direct investment from global businesses, such as how they change policy to recruit or favor foreign firms by managing their local labor markets and providing different types of government services. We already know a lot about how globalization affects government policies in democracies, but we know very little about what happens in non-democracies. Because China is the largest non-democratic recipient of foreign investment, including from the United States, it is an essential case to understand the relationship between global business and government policies on the ground. The goal of my research is to highlight the complex nature of foreign investment and the dynamic responses of local governments as they continue to engage with the global economy even in challenging political times for investors.

How has federal funding enabled you to pursue this research in ways that might not have been possible otherwise?

Federal funding has provided extraordinary support to pursue my research on this topic through better access to resources, data, and research assistance from both graduate and undergraduate students. There’s a lot of data out there, but because of Chinese data export controls and other data challenges, American researchers need to use much more labor-intensive means to collect data and do research. Without federal funding support, American researchers like myself and my team would not be able to engage in this type of research.

What are some real-world applications or policy implications of your research?

Within China, this research helps to explain variation in access to government programs like education and healthcare, which are almost all provided at the local level, for hundreds of millions of people. In addition, my research has important implications for U.S. businesses hoping to operate in China in any fashion because it highlights how local governments shape policies related to the investment environment. As part of my NSF project, I have already been invited to present this research to business communities and multiple U.S. government agencies to explain the dynamic situation U.S. businesses face in China. I look forward to continuing to share my research with academic, industry, government, and public audiences.

Why do you think federal investment in social science research is essential for addressing national and global challenges?

For a relatively small portion of federal funding, investment in evidence-based research provides disproportionate benefits. The research outputs generated by studies asking “big questions” for the future are a long-term investment that benefits many strategic interests. Just within my NSF project, for example, federal funds support business communities through illuminating investment environments in China; developing deeper area studies expertise on China, one of the most important players in both national and domestic challenges; and helping to train the next generation of researchers who will continue to contribute their analytic skills to research both inside and outside of academia after they work on my team.

What would you say to those who question the value of funding social science research with taxpayer dollars?

One purpose of the federal government, as I understand it as a political scientist, is to provide resources to different sectors of society to create the most robust research community and overall ability to tackle future challenges that we can. Social science research in particular combines deep area studies knowledge with sophisticated research methodologies that help identify and explain phenomena and trends to better inform U.S. policy. Academic research in the United States is one of its strongest comparative advantages, and the most cutting-edge research across a range of scientific fields comes from this country. Federal funding is critical to maintaining and strengthening this competitive advantage, now and in the future.

Give us an overview of your federally funded research. What problem are you addressing, and what impact do you hope your work will have?

My research covering a broad range of topics in cognitive science and neuroscience has been continuously funded over the past 25 years by the National Institute of Health, National Science Foundation, and Department of Defense. My current DoD funded project aims to develop new approaches to multi-person neuroscience based on innovations in network science methods. The project focuses on decision making in teams of humans and artificial agents. Our aim is to provide the foundational research to provide future capabilities for enhanced heterogenous human-AI teams in a variety of contexts and under several task demands requiring different levels of communication, cooperation, and complexity.

How has federal funding enabled you to pursue this research in ways that might not have been possible otherwise?

I think this question is not cast in an appropriate way. I believe the federal government has (and should) set out a research agenda for advancing fundamental scientific research. It is our job as scientists to understand the goals of calls for research proposals, decide if they are compatible with our capabilities and interests, and use our expertise to develop new research ideas that address the question that society (as embodied by government agencies) wants us to answer. I think it’s a fundamental misunderstanding of extramural funded research to think the government has any obligation to support any area of research. If we want government agency support for our research, we need to address the agenda of the government agencies. And I would argue that academics have an obligation to contribute their skills and expertise to address the needs of society, as expressed by the government (and private philanthropy).

What are some real-world applications or policy implications of your research?

Military operations often involve hybrid teams of humans and artificial agents working under high-stress conditions where effective communication, coordination, and mutual understanding are critical. Understanding the neural underpinnings of these team dynamics could lead to more effective training protocols, enhancing unit cohesion, and ultimately improving mission success rates. Insights from multi-person neuroscience could be used to identify optimal team configurations or to develop interventions that lead to improved decision-making, faster response times, and a higher degree of coordination in complex operational environments. This research is a potential catalyst for enhancing team performance in various sectors, including the military.

Why do you think federal investment in social science research is essential for addressing national and global challenges?

I think there are many national and global challenges that require the expertise of social scientists. As academics, we need to make our research useful to society whenever possible by addressing these challenges when given the opportunity.

What would you say to those who question the value of funding social science research with taxpayer dollars?

My present research addresses basic science questions that fill the knowledge gap on how the US Army can improve the performance of teams (both human, and hybrid human-AI). This is research that could only be done by someone with significant experience in social sciences (specifically cognitive science, but also to some extent operations research). Quite naturally, social scientists can do research that has an impact on society.

Give us an overview of your federally funded research. What problem are you addressing, and what impact do you hope your work will have?

We are investigating how humans and other animals put together different perspectives or views as they navigate their worlds. For example, if you are in a new place, you may look at a map on your phone. We call that a “Global Map Perspective.” Then you’ll look around to see if the buildings or other landmarks match what your map is showing. We call that a “First-Person Perspective.” People, and we think other animals, can seamlessly switch between these perspectives as they find their way around the world.

How has federal funding enabled you to pursue this research in ways that might not have been possible otherwise?

There some very basic questions that need to be answered about how we perform this cognitive function in our daily lives. Turns out, not much is known. So, we are taking an interdisciplinary approach to get answers. Liz Chrastil at UCI is investigating how humans do this by combining brain imaging with virtual reality. Our UCSD colleague, Doug Nitz, believes he can show this behavior in rats while measuring their brain responses. My group, with the help of graduate students Harrison Espino and Tim Lui, are tackling the problem with AI models and robotics.

What are some real-world applications or policy implications of your research?

The AI and robotics work could have real-world applications to autonomous exploration and self-driving vehicles. Tim Lui’s recent results show that a robot or a car equipped with a camera can use a first-person person perspective to improve the prediction of where that vehicle is on a global map perspective. Especially, in a city or outside a building, like the Social and Behavioral Science Gateway, where GPS is spotty. This could improve mapping systems for our cars, phones, and many other applications. Also, since the ability to link perspectives is essentially a memory function, it has implications for healthcare, ageing, and neurological disorders.

Why do you think federal investment in social science research is essential for addressing national and global challenges?

Social science research can lead to important innovations in a wide range of areas including, but not limited to artificial intelligence, healthcare and technology. In general, basic research is the key to major breakthroughs. Applied research is still important. But many times, the important breakthroughs come from exploration of seemingly unrelated phenomena.

What would you say to those who question the value of funding social science research with taxpayer dollars?

My answer would be that the United States is the world leader in research, not just in social science, but all research. My colleagues from around the world look to us on how to effectively conduct research. Collaboration and engagement with colleagues are absolutely necessary to generate new ideas. These collaborations are funded mostly through federal research grants. Reducing federal funding will lead to a vacuum in research, and the US will lose its status as the world’s research leader.