Abstract
Modelling — which includes computer simulation — is a scientific activity which has the aim of creating a replication of some real system such that this replication will react to inputs in a manner that resembles the reaction of the real system to the same inputs. The first step in this modelling activity is thus the identification of some part of reality as a ‘real system’ consisting of elements, of relations defined on these elements, and of relations defined on the elements of the system and its environment (Bunge,1979). We believe that the properties of the system, of its elements, and of its environment will change due to some deterministic or stochastic laws, and we make our (mathematical or computer simulation) model follow the same laws which we believe will control that part of reality which is to be modelled. Thus the second step of any modelling activity will be the detection — or rather the reconstruction — of the laws governing that part of reality we are about to model. Kreutzer (1986,2) calls this step ‘system representation’. In a third step we shall try to combine our notions of the laws governing reality into a model which may be real by itself (as is the case in animal experiments used to detect primary and secondary effects of drugs), iconic, verbal, or formal, i.e. written down in a formal language like the language of mathematics or like a computer programming language. In each of the four cases we try to draw our inferences about model behaviour to be expected from the premises incorporated into the model. In the cases of the informal models — real, iconic, verbal — these inferences are weak because real, iconic, and verbal models abound in (‘natural’) properties of their own that are not shared by the part of reality to be modelled (the ‘abundancy class’ of Stachowiak (1973, 155 – 157), whereas in the case of formal models — mathematical and computer simulation — the inferences are just as certain as our assumptions about the laws governing reality are completely incorporated into our model. In most instances, of course, they are not completely incorporated, there are rather a lot of properties of the real system that we do not know or that we cannot measure or that we cannot or do not want to formalize (the ‘preterition class’ of Stachowiak).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Alker, Hayward R., 1977: Computer-Simulationen: Unelegante Mathematik und noch schlechtere Sozialwissenschaft. In: Schmutzer, M.E.A. (Ed.): Mathematische Methoden in der Politikwissenschaft, München, pp. 115–142.
Bartholomew, David J., 1973: Stochastic Models for Social Processes. Chichester, 2nd edition.
Bunge, Mario, 1979: Treatise on Basic Philosophy, Vol. 4: Ontology II: A World of Systems. Dordrecht.
Bungers, Dieter & Hermann Quinke, 1986: A Microsimulation Model for the German Federal Training Assistance Act–Principles, Problems and Experiences. In: Orcutt, Guy H., Joachim Merz & Hermann Quinke (Eds.): Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy, Amsterdam, pp. 171–183.
Flache, Andreas & Vera Schmidt,1990: IPMOS. Interacting Populations: Modelling and Simulation. System zur Modellierung von Weidlich-Haag-Modellen, in diesem Sammelband
Forrester, Jay W., 1968: Principles of Systems, Cambridge, 2nd preliminary edition 1980.
Galler, Heinz P. & Gert Wagner, 1986: The Microsimulation Model of the Sfb3 for the Analysis of Economic and Social Policies. In: Orcutt, Guy H., Joachim Merz & Hermann Quinke (Eds.): Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy, Amsterdam, pp. 227–247.
Habib, Jack, 1986: Microanalytic Simulation Models for the Evaluation of Integrated Changes in Tax and Transfer Reform in Israel. In: Orcutt, Guy H., Joachim Merz and Hermann Quinke (Eds.): Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy, Amsterdam, pp. 117–134.
Hanneman, Robert A., 1988: Computer-Assisted Theory Building. Modeling Dynamic Social Systems, Newbury Park.
Henize, John, 1984: Critical Issues in Evaluating Socio-Economic Models. In: Ören, Tuncer I., Bernhard P. Zeigler & Maurice S. Elzas (Eds.): Simulation and Model-Based Methodologies: An Integrative View, Berlin, pp. 557–590.
Klösgen, Willy, 1986: Software Implementation of Microanalytic Simulation Models–State of the Art and Outlook. In: Orcutt, Guy H., Joachim Merz & Hermann Quinke (Eds.): Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy, Amsterdam, pp. 475–491.
Kreutzer, Wolfgang, 1986: System Simulation. Programming Styles and Languages, Sydney.
Lietmeyer, Volker, 1986: Microanalytic Tax Simulation Models in Europe: Development and Experience in the German Federal Ministry of Finance. In: Orcutt, Guy H., Joachim Merz & Hermann Quinke (Eds.): Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy, Amsterdam, pp. 139–152.
Lorenz, Edward N., 1963: “Deterministic Nonperiodic Flow”. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences 20 (1963), 130–141
Meadows, Donella H. et al., 1972: The Limits to Growth, New York: Universe.
Möhring Michael, 1990: MIMOSE. Eine funktionale Sprache zur Beschreibung und Simulation individuellen Verhaltens in interagierenden Populationen, in diesem Sammelband
Orcutt, Guy H., 1986: Views on Microanalytic Simulation Modeling, In: Orcutt, Guy H., Joachim Merz and Hermann Quinke (Eds.): Microanalytic Simulation Models to Support Social and Financial Policy, Amsterdam, pp. 9–26.
Rapoport, Anatol, 1984: Stochastic Model Building in the Social Sciences. In: Diekmann, Andreas & Peter Mitter (Eds.): Stochastic Modeling of Social Processes, Orlando, pp. 7–37.
Sfb3 (Sonderforschungsbereich 3: Mikroanalytische Grundlagen der Gesellschaftspolitik) (Ed.): Handbuch zum Mikrosimulationsmodell des Sfb3, Frankfurt: Sfb3, 1983.
Stachowiak, Herbert, 1973: Allgemeine Modelltheorie, Wien.
Troitzsch, Klaus G., 1989: Chaotisches Verhalten in einem Sozialsystem. Gegenüberstellung eines Makro-und eines Mikromodells.
Weidlich, Wolfgangand & Günter Haag, 1983: Concepts and Models of a Quantitative Sociology. The Dynamics of Interacting Populations. Berlin.
Zwicker, Eckart, 1981: Simulation und Analyse dynamischer Systeme in den Wirtschaftsund Sozialwissenschaften. Berlin.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1991 Leske + Budrich, Opladen
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Troitzsch, K.G. (1991). Methodological Problems of Computer Simulation in the Social Sciences. In: Kreutz, H., Bacher, J. (eds) Disziplin und Kreativität. Forschungen zur Soziologie und Sozialanthropologie, vol 2. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-01311-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-01311-2_4
Publisher Name: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-8100-0911-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-663-01311-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive