Experimenting with care and cod: On document-practices, versions of care and fish as the new experimental animal.

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-27 DOI:10.1177/03063127231223904
Tone Druglitrø, Kristin Asdal
{"title":"Experimenting with care and cod: On document-practices, versions of care and fish as the new experimental animal.","authors":"Tone Druglitrø, Kristin Asdal","doi":"10.1177/03063127231223904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A key ambition in care studies has been to study care in practice and <i>as</i> practice. By turning towards practices, care studies has rendered visible and acknowledged important work that is not captured through looking at formal procedures or official and written materials, such as policy documents and medical protocols. In this literature, document materials and the written have often been seen as unable to demonstrate and address the 'specificities of care' (Mol et al., 2010, p. 9). We challenge this view by showing how pragmatically-oriented approaches can be extended to the procedural and formalized aspects of care practices. We draw upon fieldwork in the life sciences-comparative immunology-investigated through experiments on Atlantic cod (<i>Gadus Morhua</i>). How to care for fish is a contested domain; many uncertainties exist around how to care for fish so that legal requirements are met. We ask: How are existing legal and ethical principles and procedures put to work in cod immunology and animal research? By what document-practices and document-tools is care for cod in research negotiated and settled? How does the cod stand out as an object of care in the life sciences? Our article answers these questions by empirically teasing out how scientists navigate the terrain and arguing for the importance of bringing the document-based realities of animal research into analysis. We do this by delineating three different <i>versions</i> of care: procedural care, skilled care, and dispassionate care.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":" ","pages":"706-727"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127231223904","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A key ambition in care studies has been to study care in practice and as practice. By turning towards practices, care studies has rendered visible and acknowledged important work that is not captured through looking at formal procedures or official and written materials, such as policy documents and medical protocols. In this literature, document materials and the written have often been seen as unable to demonstrate and address the 'specificities of care' (Mol et al., 2010, p. 9). We challenge this view by showing how pragmatically-oriented approaches can be extended to the procedural and formalized aspects of care practices. We draw upon fieldwork in the life sciences-comparative immunology-investigated through experiments on Atlantic cod (Gadus Morhua). How to care for fish is a contested domain; many uncertainties exist around how to care for fish so that legal requirements are met. We ask: How are existing legal and ethical principles and procedures put to work in cod immunology and animal research? By what document-practices and document-tools is care for cod in research negotiated and settled? How does the cod stand out as an object of care in the life sciences? Our article answers these questions by empirically teasing out how scientists navigate the terrain and arguing for the importance of bringing the document-based realities of animal research into analysis. We do this by delineating three different versions of care: procedural care, skilled care, and dispassionate care.

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
实验护理和鳕鱼:关于文件实践、护理版本和作为新实验动物的鱼类。
护理研究的一个重要目标是研究实践中的护理和作为实践的护理。通过转向实践,护理研究使那些通过研究正式程序或官方书面材料(如政策文件和医疗协议)而无法捕捉到的重要工作变得可见并得到认可。在这些文献中,文件材料和书面材料往往被视为无法展示和解决 "护理的特殊性"(Mol et al.)我们通过展示如何将实用主义导向的方法扩展到护理实践的程序化和正规化方面,对这一观点提出质疑。我们借鉴了生命科学领域的实地研究--比较免疫学--通过对大西洋鳕鱼(Gadus Morhua)的实验进行研究。如何照料鱼类是一个有争议的领域;围绕如何照料鱼类以满足法律要求存在许多不确定性。我们要问:在鳕鱼免疫学和动物研究中,现有的法律和伦理原则及程序如何发挥作用?在研究过程中,通过何种文件惯例和文件工具来协商和解决鳕鱼护理问题?在生命科学领域,鳕鱼是如何成为关注对象的?我们的文章回答了这些问题,通过实证研究揭示了科学家是如何驾驭这一领域的,并论证了将基于文件的动物研究现实纳入分析的重要性。为此,我们划分了三种不同的照料方式:程序性照料、熟练照料和冷静照料。
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
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
期刊最新文献
Wake effects and temperature plumes: Coping with non-knowledge in the expansion of wind and geothermal energy. Population curation: The construction of mutual obligation between individual and state in Danish precision medicine. Hearts and minds: The technopolitical role of affect in sociotechnical imaginaries. Cells and the city: The rise and fall of urban biopolitics in San Francisco, 1970-2020. What work does ‘contamination’ do? An agential realist account of oil wastewater and radium in groundwater
×
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