The Self & Self Agency in Research

Self agency seems like a dichotomy --- in a city like Boston where you seen evidence of collective and individual self agency through action, thought, you also sense very keenly the limits, as there are so many distractions and competing agendas. How does cognition work in unison with other socio-economic forces. Industrial psychologists tell us that there is no learning/performance without motivation and ability.

There is a collective agency (not collection agency) that gives us all a shared purpose. Too much emphasis on the self in self agency blinds us to what we might accomplish together and do indeed accomplish not always by working on a shared project consciously but also by contributing our individual thoughts and efforts in collaboration with others but also when we work independently or in conscious opposition. Collective agency is a factor all the way around.

We see this dichotomy in the psychology of the thought process. In Freudian psychology, thoughts are necessary to reduce trauma. If we can't think something through, then the trauma is unrecognized and fosters inaction and depression. Thoughts are necessary in this scenario to mitigate an individual (and perhaps an organization) being overwhelmed.

On the other hand, perhaps sometimes thoughts can increase trauma.  Can't we often increase tension and frustration with negative thoughts and our reactions to them? Other Freudian ideas such as theory of neurosis, dreams, creativity all predicated on the will to procreate being successfully channeled.

We can see the personality and its needs work out in information gathering.  In a March 18, 2014 Wall Street Journal opinion piece "Nukes and 'Snowden-Proof' Intelligence," Samantha Ravich and Carol Haave argue that countries such as the United States can find out the nuclear intent and capacities of other countries without resorting to illegal espionage/spying or high-level intelligence gathering, such as that committed by Edward Snowden or the National Security Agency's surveillance methods.

Ravich and Haave say that the NSA-type activities are now going to get harder because of countries being more aware of their records being monitored but also because these high-tech involve so many academics, who will leave a publishing footprint on their strategies and capabilities. "Fortunately, building a nuclear program takes a lot of resources and a significant talent base. Mobilizing those leaves "open-source footprints." Iranian, Pakistani, Chinese and other scientists publish their work in global journals. Strange as it may sound, even North Korean scientists publish in international journals in order to promote their work to a broader audience and secure invitations to international conferences and scientific exchanges."

Ravich and Haave also posit that the intellectual exchange over the merits of nuclear technology should also be available via academic/scholarly interaction, such as when some academics question the feasibility or desirability of a specific technological advance, such as developing nuclear capabilities. Open-source collection and analysis also provides insight into one of the most coveted areas of intelligence—leadership intent. The U.S. has a stated policy to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. To have the greatest chance of accomplishing this, we need to be able to dissuade and deter proto-nuclear states in their earliest stages of development. Open-source information can often give us better insight into foreign leaders' motivation and intent.

The authors write that these articles, published in international journals, are available as open source documents, meaning they are on the Internet and freely accessible: Political and scientific leaders, even in countries like Iran, are by no means unanimously in favor of weaponizing their nuclear programs. Their attempts to build coalitions for their positions (and against others') can seep into the public domain.

As a faculty member that teaches the importance of information literacy, I am glad to see that freedom of the press and good research/searching techniques can have a variety of security applications, in addition to the important educational functions they already possess. And, while I agree that the Internet is a unparalleled place to find academic journal articles, many of these articles are not open source in the practical sense of the word. Most academic journals are published by private publishers that charge hefty access fees in the form of subscription costs. These private publishers, such as Sage Publications and EBSCO Information Services, dramatically restrict access to important academic topics to those (wealthy) institutions, such as colleges and universities that can pay their subscription prices.  These subscription prices block access to not only possibly important national security information, such as that described by Ravich and Haave, but also important medical and legal information, etc. that could have life-saving implications as well. I look forward to the time (hopefully not too distant) when research, much of it funded by taxpayers, will truly be open source and available to all. Then, Aaron Schwatz, of blessed memory, will not have died in vain.

This process of self agency in developing a supply chain of academic information will become increasingly important as the price and availability of proprietary databases is changing. What was once an almost monopoly on academic information by databases such as EBSCO is now being challenges by alternative databases, which have different challenges. How to find reliable information on Google for example and develop personalized information networks.

The upsurge in open source material corresponds somewhat to problematic issues with traditional academic publishing. There are been studies that have questioned the peer review process and other staples of academic publishing. I have read numerous popular articles that cite social media sites with great impact. Popular culture media strikes me as more dynamic and inclusive than academic publishing and so I wonder that even if some popular culture is misleading, can't we say the same about academic press only more so?

Just as global food chains need to have numerous nodes to be effective so too do searches for information. Self agency, the ability to find, understand, and use various types of information is more powerful and important than ever.