Critical Sociology of Science and Scientific Validity

Restivo, Sal; Loughlin, Julia

doi:10.1177/107554708700800304

Cited by 20 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…So far as morality is concerned, the dominant tendency here is not to celebrate moral anarchy but to interpret how locally varying moral standards acquire their obligatory character. "hegemonic," as "masculinist," as "dehumanizing," as "mystifying") and by those who reckon that a proper task for scholars is to open up alternative visions of what science might be and how its social relations ought to be constituted (Martin 1993, Restivo 1989, Lynch & Fuhrman 1991, Scott et a1 1990cf Collins 1991, Lynch 1992b.…”

Section: Sociology Of Scientijic Knowledge and The Academic Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge

Shapin¹

1995

Annual Review of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK) is one of the profession's most marginal specialties, yet its objects of inquiry, its modes of inquiry, and certain of its findings have very substantial bearing upon the nature and scope of tihe sociological enterprise in general. While traditional sociology of knowledge asked how, and to what extent, "social factors" might influence the products of the mind, SSK sought to show that knowledge was constitutively social, and in so doing, it raised fundamental questions about taken-for-granted divisions between "social versus cognitive, or natural, factors." This piece traces the historical development of the sociology of scientific knowledge and its relations with sociology and cultural inquiry as a whole. It identifies dominant "localist" sensibilities in SSK and the consequent problem it now confronts of how scientific knowledge travels. Finally, it describes several strands of criticism of SSK that have emerged from among its own practitioners, noting the ways in which some criticisms can be seen as a revival of old aspirations toward privileged meta-languages.There is no shortage of reviews and assessments of the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK). Most have been written by critics or by participants meaning to put their special stamp on a contentious and splintered field.' I too am a participant: My views about what the field is, and ought to be, are strongly held; they have been canvassed elsewhere, and they will be unavoidably evident in this survey. Yet my purpose here is less to score points than to offer a critical survey 'special note should be taken of Lynch (1993:Ch 2-4), which, while it argues a vigorous case for the virtues of ethnomethodology, is a detailed critical survey of recent trends in the social studies of science. SHAPINofhow SSKdeveloped, and continues to develop, in relation to sociology, and to make the leading concerns of the field rather more comprehensible to sociologists in general than they have been. For this specialty, such a purpose is not banal, as neither the place of SSK in the sociological culture nor its implications for the future of sociology+specially social theory-have been adequately canvassed b e f~r e .~The "here and everywhere" of my title refers at once to the problematic place of SSK within academic sociology and to a central problem it has generated and now confronts-how to interpret the relationship between the local settings in which scientific knowledge is produced and the unique efficiency with which such knowledge seems to travel. Sociology of ScientiJic Knowledge and the Academic CultureSSK must count as one of sociology's notable recent successes. Emerging not more than 25 years ago, in the 1970s and early 1980s it was an almost exclusively British practice (Collins 1983a:26&71). Now there are influential practitioners throughout North America, as well as in France, Germany, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Israel, and Australia; and key Anglophone works have been translated into French, Italian, Japanese, Pol...

show abstract

Section: Sociology Of Scientijic Knowledge and The Academic Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge

Shapin¹

1995

Annual Review of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One of the tasks of the study, which was solved by statistical methods, was to identify amongst students a group of individuals who (Newcomb & Bentler, 1988), according to their personal characteristics and circumstances, are vulnerable to drug use and addiction (Restivo & Loughlin, 2016).…”

Section: Problem Statementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sten Score Method And Cluster Analysis: Identifying Respondents Vulnerable To Drug Abuse

Lukianova¹,

Burkatovskaya²,

Fell³

2018

The European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, the authors assess the methodological reliability of big data processing in sociological research. The authors compare sten score method and cluster analysis as methods of processing the results of socio-psychological tests aimed at identifying groups of young people potentially vulnerable to drug addiction. The survey was conducted in eight universities in a city in Siberia with a large student population where 22884 students aged from 18 to 25 were questioned. First, the obtained results were processed by using the sten score method. Then, cluster analysis was conducted to define a high-risk group of students having a propensity for drug consumption. Advantages and disadvantages of the two methods for processing a large sample of data are compared. The results of this comparison demonstrate that the cluster analysis method is the most appropriate method for this type of research as it produces statistically correct data. The use of cluster analysis makes it possible to work with any type of information, both qualitative and qualitative data. On the other hand, the sten scores method can only be applied in certain conditions, i.e. where the original distribution resembles a normal distribution; where some theoretical basis to expect normal distribution exists, and where there is certainty that the normalization group is sufficiently large and representative to be a true reflection of the population.

show abstract

“…Similarly, Staw (1 985) concurs with an objectivist perspective in claiming that research aimed at organizational symbolism should also try to meet the objectivist standards of validity to increase the predictive power of organizational theories. Restivo and Loughlin (1987) and Lindblom (1987) take a different standpoint, presenting alternative quality standards to the traditional validity measures of natural science: 'Because we cannot widely achieve a very high degree of (natural science) validity, much of our efforts as social scientists ought to go in other directions' (Lindblom, 1987, p. 513). Restivo and Loughlin (1987) state that treating qualitative methods primarily as complements to quantitative methods should lead to reduced rather than increased validity, and negative consequences for the contribution to practical use in society as well as to science.…”

Section: A Risk ~Fer-simplijcation or Partialipmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Restivo and Loughlin (1987) and Lindblom (1987) take a different standpoint, presenting alternative quality standards to the traditional validity measures of natural science: 'Because we cannot widely achieve a very high degree of (natural science) validity, much of our efforts as social scientists ought to go in other directions' (Lindblom, 1987, p. 513). Restivo and Loughlin (1987) state that treating qualitative methods primarily as complements to quantitative methods should lead to reduced rather than increased validity, and negative consequences for the contribution to practical use in society as well as to science. According to Lindblom (1987), change in complex action patterns through social learning is even accelerated by scientific focus, and our set of structured scientific propositions is limited in its ability to keep up with social change.…”

Section: A Risk ~Fer-simplijcation or Partialipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Networks Among Small Firms: Implications for Strategy Research Methodology*

Borch

Arthur

1995

J Management Studies

140

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper deals with the choice of methodological approach within strategic network research. Network-oriented research approaches indicate a broader set of organizational and environmental variables. The issue of trust in network relations implicates contextual aspects such as the socio-cultural foundation of people's interaction. The striving toward more complex, multi-level models of strategy is seen to put a heavy burden on the development of adequate strategy research methods. The paper reports and interprets experience from a case study of inter-organizational exchange governance in small firms. The discussion suggests a need for more in-depth knowledge of cultural contexts, and of socioeconomic relations of actors within strategic networks. The paper recommends a search for new methodological inputs from other academic disciplines more experienced with human interaction research. In particular, methodological tools found within the field of social anthropology are recommended.

show abstract

Critical Sociology of Science and Scientific Validity

Cited by 20 publications

References 9 publications

Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge

Here and Everywhere: Sociology of Scientific Knowledge

Sten Score Method And Cluster Analysis: Identifying Respondents Vulnerable To Drug Abuse

Strategic Networks Among Small Firms: Implications for Strategy Research Methodology*

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About