I’d consider psychology and economics in general to be social sciences, and that would include consumer psychology and at least parts of techno-economics.
However, almost all of the questions in Other questions are definitely not social science questions, and instead animal behaviour/ethology, animal cognition, zoology more generally, ecology and philosophy, although some approaches in common with social sciences might be useful.
Also “What are the most tractable and cost-effective interventions to improve wild animal welfare?” seems more like a generalist and/or interdisciplinary research question, although it could involve some social science.
We agree on economics, it’s more that techno-economic analysis is quite different (just had someone on my team do techno-economic work that would be relevant to this list, but she is maximally far from a social scientist in skillset and self-identification).
I think for some parts of social psychology it might be considered a social science, though in general most social scientists would say the definition of social science is something like “the dependent variable are societal-level phenomena” by which economics, political science, sociology etc. are social sciences, but psychology is clearly not (and in most universities, psychology would not be in the social sciences department).
But I think we agree on the broader point that the current title is a bit of a misnomer.
Social sciences are concerned with much more than societal level phenomena. Relationships and interactions between people count, too.
FWIW, my experience in Canada has been that psychology is typically part of the faculty of social sciences (or a combined one with humanities and/or arts).
I’d consider psychology and economics in general to be social sciences, and that would include consumer psychology and at least parts of techno-economics.
However, almost all of the questions in Other questions are definitely not social science questions, and instead animal behaviour/ethology, animal cognition, zoology more generally, ecology and philosophy, although some approaches in common with social sciences might be useful.
Also “What are the most tractable and cost-effective interventions to improve wild animal welfare?” seems more like a generalist and/or interdisciplinary research question, although it could involve some social science.
We agree on economics, it’s more that techno-economic analysis is quite different (just had someone on my team do techno-economic work that would be relevant to this list, but she is maximally far from a social scientist in skillset and self-identification).
I think for some parts of social psychology it might be considered a social science, though in general most social scientists would say the definition of social science is something like “the dependent variable are societal-level phenomena” by which economics, political science, sociology etc. are social sciences, but psychology is clearly not (and in most universities, psychology would not be in the social sciences department).
But I think we agree on the broader point that the current title is a bit of a misnomer.
Social sciences are concerned with much more than societal level phenomena. Relationships and interactions between people count, too.
FWIW, my experience in Canada has been that psychology is typically part of the faculty of social sciences (or a combined one with humanities and/or arts).