Abstract
Incorporation of ‘social’ variables into epidemiological models remains a challenge. Too much detail and models cease to be useful; too little and the very notion of infection – a highly social process in human populations – may be considered with little reference to the social. The French sociologist Émile Durkheim proposed that the scientific study of society required identification and study of ‘social currents’. Such ‘currents’ are what we might today describe as ‘emergent properties’, specifiable variables appertaining to individuals and groups, which represent the perspectives of social actors as they experience the environment in which they live their lives. Here we review the ways in which one particular emergent property, hope, relevant to a range of epidemiological situations, might be used in epidemiological modelling of infectious diseases in human populations. We also indicate how such an approach might be extended to include a range of other potential emergent properties to represent complex social and economic processes bearing on infectious disease transmission.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful to Dr Catherine McGowan and Dr Shelley Lees for their comments on an earlier draft of this paper.
Tony Barnett thanks Dr Erika Mansnerus for involving him in her postdoctoral work on models and sharing that work with him over several years and Dr Valerie Curtis and Dr Robert Aunger for spending time with him explaining and discussing their work and sharing an early draft of their latest book.
We would all like to thank three anonymous reviewers for their very helpful and thorough reading of this paper.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. This approach is of course not restricted to human populations but applies to populations of all living things.
2. This is a quote from a review of Mary Morgan's book The world in the model by Catherine Z. Elgin of Harvard University, http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-World-Model-Economists-Think/dp/0521176190, accessed 21 May 2014.
3. This in no sense means irrational. The source for this use of the term here is Max Weber's characterisation of the types of action, a typology derived from a means-end schema in which the rational types of action, zweckrationalität, wertrationalität, affectual and traditional action sit alongside a poorly defined realm of what Weber considers to be ‘non-social’ behaviour (see Weber & Parsons, Citation1947). This is the focus of the paragraph.
4. Elsewhere a related analysis of some of these described as ‘emotions’ is offered by Denton (Citation2009).
5. Aunger and Curtis would not necessarily agree with this characterisation and use.