Abstract
This is a critical and perhaps unprecedented time for the social sciences in public health. While there are many opportunities for the social sciences to continue making transformative contributions to improve population health, there are significant challenges in doing so, particularly in a rapidly changing political landscape. Such challenges are both external (e.g., congressional calls for reducing social science funding) and internal (e.g., scholars criticizing the social sciences for being stagnant and siloed). This paper highlights four key tensions that the field is grappling with and that have direct implications for how to train the next generation of social scientists in public health. We also discuss how departmental and institutional decisions made in response to these tensions will determine how the social sciences in public health are ultimately recognized, sustained, and advanced.
Highlights
We discuss how departmental and institutional decisions made in response to these tensions will determine how the social sciences in public health are recognized, sustained, and advanced
While the specific theories and methods that each discipline employs vary, the value of the social sciences relates in part to their common focus on identifying and addressing persistent social realities and inequalities, and shared interest in advancing understanding of social forces that shape population health
A second key tension pertains to the role of the social sciences in framing the questions asked to advance public health, and whether social science research should focus on issues perceived to have high policy relevance
Summary
Challenges come from within the social sciences. In a widely discussed OpEd in The New York Times, Yale physician and sociologist Nicholas Christakis excoriated the social sciences, claiming that the lack of change in social science departments and disciplines is “counterproductive, constraining engagement with the scientific cutting edge and stifling the creation of new and useful knowledge” [16]. In the sections that follow, we highlight four such tensions, including [1] the balance of disciplinary versus interdisciplinary structures; [2] the contribution of the social sciences in framing the questions asked to advance public health; [3] the translation of research beyond academia to impact population health; and [4] the funding and institutional sustainability of the social sciences in public health.2 While this is not an exhaustive list, it represents tensions that the field is currently grappling with and that have direct implications for how to train the generation of social scientists in public health. These decisions will help to determine how the social sciences in public health are recognized, sustained, and advanced
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
