SCIENTIFIC AGENCY AND SOCIAL SCAFFOLDING IN CONTEMPORARY DATA-INTENSIVE BIOLOGY

S. Leonelli
{"title":"SCIENTIFIC AGENCY AND SOCIAL SCAFFOLDING IN CONTEMPORARY DATA-INTENSIVE BIOLOGY","authors":"S. Leonelli","doi":"10.5749/j.ctvnp0krm.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is widely recognised that social scaffolding is crucial to the entrenchment of new technologies and related standards and practices in scientific research, as well as to its manifestations and results. At the same time, there is little understanding of the circumstances under which, and the reasons why, some forms of sociality are effective in promoting particular types of scientific work. This chapter explores these questions by focusing on two forms of social scaffolding involved in the development of practices of data dissemination through digital means – and particularly infrastructures such as online databases – within the contemporary life sciences: (1) ontology consortia, which have recently emerged as de facto regulatory bodies for data curation in the US and Europe, and (2) steering committees for model organism communities, which play significant roles in the governance of biological research in the UK. I discuss the successful transformation of these initially ad hoc groups into scientific institutions with political and epistemic visibility and power. Drawing on political theory, I then argue that viewing these organisations as social movements is a fruitful strategy to understand their development from informal gatherings into wellrecognised regulatory bodies, and how this process of institutionalisation builds on highly entrenched forms of group socialisation. This in turn facilitates an analysis of the interrelation between institutional and infrastructural scaffolding involved in the evolution of scientific knowledge-making activities.","PeriodicalId":230813,"journal":{"name":"Beyond the Meme","volume":"317 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Beyond the Meme","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5749/j.ctvnp0krm.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

It is widely recognised that social scaffolding is crucial to the entrenchment of new technologies and related standards and practices in scientific research, as well as to its manifestations and results. At the same time, there is little understanding of the circumstances under which, and the reasons why, some forms of sociality are effective in promoting particular types of scientific work. This chapter explores these questions by focusing on two forms of social scaffolding involved in the development of practices of data dissemination through digital means – and particularly infrastructures such as online databases – within the contemporary life sciences: (1) ontology consortia, which have recently emerged as de facto regulatory bodies for data curation in the US and Europe, and (2) steering committees for model organism communities, which play significant roles in the governance of biological research in the UK. I discuss the successful transformation of these initially ad hoc groups into scientific institutions with political and epistemic visibility and power. Drawing on political theory, I then argue that viewing these organisations as social movements is a fruitful strategy to understand their development from informal gatherings into wellrecognised regulatory bodies, and how this process of institutionalisation builds on highly entrenched forms of group socialisation. This in turn facilitates an analysis of the interrelation between institutional and infrastructural scaffolding involved in the evolution of scientific knowledge-making activities.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
当代数据密集型生物学中的科学代理和社会脚手架
人们普遍认识到,社会支架对于巩固科学研究中的新技术和有关标准和做法及其表现形式和结果至关重要。与此同时,人们对某些形式的社会在何种情况下能够有效地促进特定类型的科学工作以及其原因知之甚少。本章通过关注当代生命科学中通过数字手段(特别是在线数据库等基础设施)发展数据传播实践所涉及的两种形式的社会脚手架来探讨这些问题:(1)本体联盟,最近在美国和欧洲成为数据管理的事实上的监管机构;(2)模式生物群落指导委员会,在英国的生物研究治理中发挥着重要作用。我讨论了这些最初的特设小组成功转变为具有政治和认知可见性和权力的科学机构。然后,根据政治理论,我认为将这些组织视为社会运动是一种富有成效的策略,可以理解它们从非正式聚会发展为公认的监管机构,以及这一制度化过程如何建立在高度根深蒂固的群体社会化形式之上。这反过来又有助于分析科学知识创造活动演变过程中涉及的体制和基础设施框架之间的相互关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
INDEX PROMISCUOUS INVENTIONS: CONTENT MATTERS: WICKED SYSTEMS AND THE FRICTION BETWEEN “OLD THEORY AND NEW DATA” IN BIOLOGY, SOCIAL SCIENCE, AND ARCHAEOLOGY THE EVOLUTION OF LANGUAGE AS TECHNOLOGY:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1