Biomedical science in supermarket tabloids

Supermarket tabloids present, as truthful, stories about biomedical science that are greatly exaggerated and often fictitious. Apparently a sizable portion of their large readership accepts these stories as correct. This is “scientific journalism” at its worst, but its standards are not wholly different from those of the mainline press. Allan Mazur is both a sociologist and a technologist. He received an M.S. in Engineering from UCLA and worked for several years as an aerospace engineer before obtaining a Ph.D. in sociology from Johns Hopkins University. He has been a member of the social science faculties of MIT and Stanford University, and is currently a professor in Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs.The Dynamics of Technical Controversy (1981) is his major work on public disputes over technology, and he continues to work in this area as well as in biosociology.     

Biomedical science in supermarket tabloids

Supermarket tabloids present, as truthful, stories about biomedical science that are greatly exaggerated and often fictitious. Apparently a sizable portion of their large readership accepts these stories as correct. This is "scientific journalism" at its worst, but its standards are not wholly different from those of the mainline press. Reprinted from Knowledge and Policy: The International Journal of Knowledge Transfer and Utilization, Fall 1989, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 74–81. Allan Mazur is both a sociologist and a technologist. He received an M.S. in Engineering from UCLA and worked for several years as an aerospace engineer before obtaining a Ph.D. in sociology from Johns Hopkins University. He has been a member of the social science faculties of MIT and Stanford University, and is currently a professor in Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. The Dynamics of Technical Controversy (1981) is his major work on public disputes over technology, and he continues to work in this area as well as in biosociology.     

Quality of life and social support of patients being evaluated for bone marrow transplantation

A sample of 437 patients completed self-report measures of quality of life and social support while they were being evaluated for bone marrow transplantation (BMT) at The Johns Hopkins Oncology Center. Generally, the candidates showed reasonably high levels of quality of life (QOL) on the Satisfaction with Life Domains Scale (SLDS), their present ranking on the Cantril Self-Anchoring Ladder of Life, and their scores on the Bradburn Positive Affect Scale. The level of QOL of these candidates for transplant was significantly related to their level of social support. Both availability and adequacy of social support for these transplant candidates were found to be significantly related to QOL as measured by the SLDS. Availability of social support as measured by patient membership in religious and other organizations was significantly related to Positive Affect but not Negative Affect. The Family APGAR and Relational Support Scales measures of social support were significantly correlated with both Positive and Negative Affect.     

Whose social values? Evaluating Canada’s ‘death of evidence’ controversy

With twentieth- and twenty-first-century philosophy of science’s unfolding acceptance of the nature of scientific inquiry being value-laden, the persistent worry has been that there are no means for legitimate negotiation of the social or non-epistemic values that enter into science. The rejection of the value-free ideal in science has thereby been coupled with the spectres of indiscriminate relativism and bias in scientific inquiry. I challenge this view in the context of recently expressed concerns regarding Canada's death of evidence controversy. The worry, raised by Stathis Psillos, is that as constructivist accounts of science demoted the previously secure status of evidence for drawing justified conclusions in science, we were left with no rational delineation between the right and wrong values for science. The implication for the death of evidence controversy is that we may have no rational grounds for claiming that the Canadian Government is wrong to interfere with scientific enterprise. But he does offer another avenue for reaching the conclusion that the wrong social values are directing the current stifling of some sectors of Canadian science. Psillos draws from standpoint epistemologies to devise a salient defence of ‘valuing evidence’ as a universalizable social value. That is, government bodies ought to enable scientific research via adequate funding as well as political non-interference. In this paper, I counter that (i) non-epistemic values can be rationally evaluated and that (ii) standpoint epistemology’s universalizable standpoint provides an inadequate framework for negotiating social values in science. Regarding (i), I draw from the evidence-based medicine debate in philosophy of medicine and from feminist empiricist investigations into the science–values relationship in order to make the argument for empirically driven value arbitration. If social values can be rationally chosen in the context of justification, then we can have grounds for charging the Canadian leadership with being ‘at war with science’. (ii) I further argue that my recommended empiricist methodology is preferable to Psillos’s search for universalizable perspectives for negotiating social values in science because the latter method permits little more than the trivial conclusion that evidence is valuable to science.     

Talking about science interests: the importance of social recognition when students talk about their interests in STEM

Although interest development is often conceptualized as a process that occurs within an individual, interest can be developed through various social mechanisms. Messages that suggest that one is or is not welcome within a context may serve to bolster or attenuate interest in those contexts. In a sample of first semester freshmen undergraduate science students, we tested whether or not talking with close others about one’s interests, and receiving social recognition during those conversations, was related to having a greater science career interest over time. Our findings suggest that the way in which students perceive others’ reactions to their scientific interests (social recognition) during these conversations may have the greatest impact on students that face greater external barriers to persisting. We found that positive social recognition appraisals that convey that a listener understands and encourages one’s interest in science predicted a greater science career interest over time for women, but not men. The impact of positive social recognition appraisals on interest in a science career was greatest among women with relatively low or average science identities, but not for women with a relatively high science identity. The implications for the development of students’ interest and for broadening participation in science are discussed.

     

Socially relevant philosophy of science: an introduction

This paper provides an argument for a more socially relevant philosophy of science (SRPOS). Our aims in this paper are to characterize this body of work in philosophy of science, to argue for its importance, and to demonstrate that there are significant opportunities for philosophy of science to engage with and support this type of research. The impetus of this project was a keen sense of missed opportunities for philosophy of science to have a broader social impact. We illustrate various ways in which SRPOS can provide social benefits, as well as benefits to scientific practice and philosophy itself. Also, SRPOS is consistent with some historical and contemporary goals of philosophy of science. We’re calling for an expansion of philosophy of science to include more of this type of work. In order to support this expansion, we characterize philosophy of science as an epistemic community and examine the culture and practices of philosophy of science that can help or hinder research in this area.     

Family and Nonfamily Components of Social Support as Buffers of Stress for College Women1

Two samples of college women (N= 273 and N= 99) were administered a stress inventory, a social support scale, and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist. Separate measures of family and nonfamily social support were obtained as well as separate measures of types of social support: social availability, tangible support, information/guidance, and emotional support. With the total symptom score used as the dependent variable, nonfamily social support showed a clear buffering effect on life stress in both samples, whereas family social support showed significant buffering only in Sample 2. Multiple regression analyses indicated that nonfamily emotional support was more effective as a buffer than family social support in both samples. There were no clear differences among the types of social support in their buffering effectiveness All four symptom subscales showed buffering trends, but depression was the only subscale that was significantly buffered in both samples by nonfamily social support. The greater effectiveness of nonfamily social support as a buffer of stress is discussed in terms of the possible greater availablity, both physically and psychologically, of nonfamily friends for late adolescent and young adult women.     

Sociology as a Naïve Science: Alfred Schütz and the Phenomenological Theory of Attitudes

Alfred Schütz is often credited with providing sociology with a firm ground derived from phenomenology of science and justifying it as a science operating within natural attitude. Although his project of social science draws extensively on Edmund Husserl’s theory of attitudes, it would be incorrect to assume that Schütz shares with the founder of phenomenology his conception of science. This paper compares Husserl’s and Schütz’s views on the structure and meaning of science and traces the roots of their radical divergence. Whereas Husserl increasingly emphasises the importance of phenomenological reduction for the genuine human science, Schütz eventually rejects reduction and restricts the social science to a specific system of relevancies within the reality of the lifeworld. This paper presents the argument that Schütz’s conception eliminates the possibility of a phenomenological justification of social science, as it implies that there are no rationally justifiable grounds to pursue science. In this way, Schütz’s views substantially differ from the phenomenological theory of science and become open to the phenomenological critique of naivety.     

A Critically Appreciative Valuation of Social Constructionist Contributions to Organizational Science

Modernist approaches to research in the social sciences dominate academia, including much of organization science. Discovery through reason, observation, and analysis are the quintessential modernist quests. However, this reductionist approach to essentialize the social through the usage of language, a product of culture with its inevitable entanglement with cultural ideology, values, sensibility, intelligibility, and history, is akin to capturing a moving target on shifting grounds. Positing social constructionism as an alternative, we explain it has revolutionalized the social sciences and organization science alike; offer an array of social constructionist inquiry methodologies to fuel generative possibilities for organization research; compare and contrast modernist and social constructionist organization theories, research methodologies and assumptive metaphors to accentuate the textual and dialogic potential social constructionism brings to organization science; and conclude with creative ways social constructionism can realize actionable knowledge through co-creation among communities.     

B. F. Skinner and G. H. Mead: on biological science and social science.

Skinner's contributions to psychology provide a unique bridge between psychology conceptualized as a biological science and psychology conceptualized as a social science. Skinner focused on behavior as a naturally occurring biological phenomenon of interest in its own right, functionally related to surrounding events and, in particular (like phylogenesis), subject to selection by its consequences. This essentially biological orientation was further enhanced by Skinner's emphasis on the empirical foundations provided by laboratory-based experimental analyses of behavior, often with nonhuman subjects. Skinner's theoretical writings, however, also have affinity with the traditions of constructionist social science. The verbal behavior of humans is said to be subject, like other behavior, to functional analyses in terms of its environment, in this case its social context. Verbal behavior in turn makes it possible for us to relate to private events, a process that ultimately allows for the development of consciousness, which is thus said to be a social product. Such ideas make contact with aspects of G. H. Mead's social behaviorism and, perhaps of more contemporary impact in psychology, L. Vygotsky's general genetic law of cultural development. Failure to articulate both the biological and the social science aspects of Skinner's theoretical approach to psychology does a disservice to his unique contribution to a discipline that remains fragmented between two intellectual traditions.     

REALISM WITHOUT TRUTH: A REVIEW OF GIERE'S SCIENCE WITHOUT LAWS AND SCIENTIFIC PERSPECTIVISM

An increasingly popular view among philosophers of science is that of science as action—as the collective activity of scientists working in socially‐coordinated communities. Scientists are seen not as dispassionate pursuers of Truth, but as active participants in a social enterprise, and science is viewed on a continuum with other human activities. When taken to an extreme, the science‐as‐social‐process view can be taken to imply that science is no different from any other human activity, and therefore can make no privileged claims about its knowledge of the world. Such extreme views are normally contrasted with equally extreme views of classical science, as uncovering Universal Truth. In Science Without Laws and Scientific Perspectivism, Giere outlines an approach to understanding science that finds a middle ground between these extremes. He acknowledges that science occurs in a social and historical context, and that scientific models are constructions designed and created to serve human ends. At the same time, however, scientific models correspond to parts of the world in ways that can legitimately be termed objective. Giere's position, perspectival realism, shares important common ground with Skinner's writings on science, some of which are explored in this review. Perhaps most fundamentally, Giere shares with Skinner the view that science itself is amenable to scientific inquiry: scientific principles can and should be brought to bear on the process of science. The two approaches offer different but complementary perspectives on the nature of science, both of which are needed in a comprehensive understanding of science.     

SCIENTISM, INTERPRETATION, AND CRITICISM

Abstract. What is the relationship between natural science, social science, and religion? The dominant paradigm in contemporary social science is scientism, the attempt to apply the methods of natural science to the study of society. However, scientism is problematic: it rests on a conception of natural science that cannot be sustained. Natural scientific understanding emerges from an instrumental and objectifying relation to the world; it is oriented toward control and manipulation of the physical world. Social-scientific understanding, by contrast, must begin with a practical and meaningful relation to the world: it is oriented toward the mediation of values and objective possibilities in the social world. Social science is therefore a form of practical reason based on objective claims. But while social-scientific understanding starts with interpretation, its possibilities by no means end there. In particular, by developing abstract and objectified models of society as a system, social science opens existing social organization to critical reflection. Religion, by contrast, is a form of speculative reason about ultimate values, based on subjective claims of religious experience. Social science nevertheless shares with religion an orientation toward values and concern with the “good life.”     

Science,Scientism and Imaginaries of Publics in the UK: Passive Objects,Incipient Threats

Two-way public engagement with science is an important modern democratic practice that paradoxically coincides with the intensifications of state surveillance and policing of publics and social movements engaging with issues involving science. This raises important questions about the contemporary anatomies of publics, and what count as legitimate expressions of public concern over scientific stakes within the knowledge economy. Implicit in the tension between inclusion and surveillance are concerns over the social meaning and authority of science amongst both scientific practitioners and publics. Bringing science and technology studies (STS) and social movement studies (SMS) into dialogue offers a means to explore the neglected ontological stakes in the framing of scientific imaginaries of publics, and public imaginaries of science. Post-WWII UK science–publics relations have emerged in three significant modalities, with publics imagined: as passive non-entities, circa 1950–1990 (continuing); as incipient threats due to presumed deficits in their grasp of science 1990–2000 (continuing); and, since circa 2000, as politicised threats requiring state control. Each modality is shaped by elite denial of the normative commitments embedded within science as surrogate politics—scientism. In each mode, scientistic elite emphasis on epistemic issues forecloses engagement with broader public meanings expressing legitimate normative and ontological differences. Fusing the more epistemic focus of STS with SMS's emphasis on meaning and democratic process offers a route to deeper democratic forms of public engagement with what is called science, which would also precipitate more accountability in elite discourses around science and technology.     

A Life Domains Perspective on Acculturation and Psychological Adjustment: A Study of Refugees from the Former Soviet Union

The study articulates a contextual approach to research on acculturation of immigrants, suggesting that the relationship between acculturation and adjustment is dependent on the cultural demands of the life domains considered. Specifically, the study investigated the mediating effects of adjustment in occupational and social life domains on the relationship between acculturation and psychological adjustment for 391 refugees from the former Soviet Union. The study used bilinear measures of acculturation to the host (American) and heritage (Russian) cultures. Using Structural Equation Modeling, the study confirmed the hypothesized relationships, such that the positive effects of American acculturation on psychological adjustment were mediated by occupational adjustment, and the effects of Russian acculturation on psychological adjustment were mediated by satisfaction with co-ethnic social support. Psychological adjustment was measured in two ways, as psychological well-being, using a measure of life satisfaction, and as symptoms of depression and anxiety, using the Hopkins symptom checklist (HSCL). Life satisfaction served as a mediator between adjustment in occupational and social domains and HSCL, suggesting that it may be an intervening variable through which environmental stress associated with immigration contributes to the development of symptoms of mental disorder.     

‘Historicising Common Sense’

This essay is an expanded set of comments on the social psychology papers written for the special issue on History and Social Psychology. It considers what social psychology, and particularly the theory of social representations, might offer historians working on similar problems, and what historical methods might offer social psychology. The social history of thinking has been a major theme in twentieth and twenty-first century historical writing, represented most recently by the genre of ??cultural history??. Cultural history and the theory of social representations have common ancestors in early twentieth-century social science. Nevertheless, the two lines of research have developed in different ways and are better seen as complementary than similar. The theory of social representations usefully foregrounds issues, like social division and change over time, that cultural history relegates to the background. But for historians, the theory of social representations seems oddly fixated on comparing the thought styles associated with positivist science and ??common sense??. Using historical analysis, this essay tries to dissect the core opposition ??science : common sense?? and argues for a more flexible approach to comparing modes of thought.     

Utilization of social sciences in public discourse: Labeling problems

This article reports the main results of an empirical research project on the utilization of social sciences in the field of labor market and educational policy in West Germany since the 1960s. The research interest focused upon utilization of social science knowledge in public discourse paralleling policy decisions. The analysis shows that the social sciences are used extensively for labeling social problems. The use made of social science knowledge can be described as a certain combination of instrumental and conceptual utilization. In the concluding section of the article, the innovation problem of social science utilization is considered. Dr. Matthias Wingens is senior research associate with the Sociological Research Center “Social Problems” at the University of Bremen. His main research interests include the utilization of social science knowledge, the sociology of knowledge, and educational research. Dr. Ansgar Weymann is chair of the Department of Sociology and head of the Sociological Research Center “Social Problems” at the University of Bremen. His main research interests include sociological theory, utilization of social research, research on education, labor market, and employment, and research on socialization and life-course.     

Team Science,Justice, and the Co‐Production of Knowledge

Science increasingly consists of interdisciplinary team‐based research to address complex social, biomedical, public health, and global challenges through a practice known as team science. In this article, I discuss the added value of team science, including participatory team science, for generating scientific knowledge. Participatory team science involves the inclusion of public stakeholders on science teams as co‐producers of knowledge. I also discuss how constructivism offers a common philosophical foundation for both community psychology and team science, and how this foundation aligns well with contemporary developments in science that emphasize the co‐production of knowledge. I conclude with a discussion of how the co‐production of knowledge in team science can promote justice.     

SOCIAL RESEARCH ON SCIENCE AND RELIGION IN NORDIC COUNTRIES

This article presents a review of the literature on science and religion in Nordic countries. Seventy-seven articles, books, and chapters on the topic were collected from five major scholarly databases between 1997 and 2018. We scrutinized how research in this data set was engaged with social scientific research. Most of the research was not social scientific. It was primarily philosophical, theological, and historical research; very little presented empirical and theoretical social scientific research. The studies reflected societal discussions, bringing out some cultural dimensions and social issues, but not specifically in the Nordic context. Some societal aspects were highlighted, such as ethics and climate change, but these were not necessarily tied to the Nordic societies. We propose that in the Nordic context there seems to be a need for social scientific research on science and religion. This research could use theoretical perspectives from, for instance, sociology, science and technology studies, higher education studies, and anthropological research.     

Humanistic Themes in Science Fiction: An Interview With David A. Kyle

This article reviews how science fiction writers have employed a popular and specialized literary medium in order to offer creative insights into human behavior and social structures. David A. Kyle is introduced to readers as a science fiction writer, publisher, cofounder of Gnome Press, historian of the science fiction field, and an avid promoter of science fiction. Kyle offers candid insights related to how science fiction has encouraged a serious exploration of psychological, philosophical, educational, and sociological questions. His fundamental premise is that science fiction allows us to explore what it means to be human in a technological and scientifically oriented society. The article concludes with a summary of how literary figures, social scientists (psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, etc.), and teachers have also successfully used works of science fiction and literary criticism for various purposes.