Demarcating Fringe Science for Policy

Collins, Harry; Bartlett, Andrew; Reyes-Galindo, Luis

doi:10.1162/posc_a_00248

Cited by 27 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This contrasts sharply with physics. Bartlett and Reyes-Galindo have carried out extensive empirical analysis regarding the legitimacy of physics claims made by scientists who are not professional, practising physicists (Collins et al., 2017). This physics ‘boundary work’ (Gieryn, 1983) has shed light on the sociological structures of so-called ‘fringe’ or unorthodox physics and, importantly, to the relationships between producers of physics’ primary inscriptions and outsiders to the physics community.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather, these examples are intended to serve as illustrations of the way in which Big Data can be performed and scientifically positioned as ‘legitimate’ social science. This is crucial because, as we show in our final discussions, recent studies in the sociology of physics have shown that analysis of physics ‘data’ performed outside of the traditionally-constituted locus of legitimate interpretation is overwhelmingly rejected as ‘crackpot science’ (Collins et al., 2017). This is true even if the knowledge claims that are being produced are the technically-savvy products of people with significant expertise in physics or related disciplines.…”

Section: Thoughts On the Social Sciences Computational Social Science And The Locus Of Legitimate Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…8 Curiously, electrical engineers are well represented in ‘fringe’ physics communities (Collins et al., 2017). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The locus of legitimate interpretation in Big Data sciences: Lessons for computational social science from -omic biology and high-energy physics

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper argues that analyses of the ways in which Big Data has been enacted in other academic disciplines can provide us with concepts that will help understand the application of Big Data to social questions. We use examples drawn from our Science and Technology Studies (STS) analyses of-omic biology and high energy physics to demonstrate the utility of three theoretical concepts: (i) primary and secondary inscriptions, (ii) crafted and found data, and (iii) the locus of legitimate interpretation. These help us to show how the histories, organisational forms, and power dynamics of a field lead to different enactments of big data. The paper suggests that these concepts can be used to help us to understand the ways in which Big Data is being enacted in the domain of the social sciences, and to outline in general terms the ways in which this enactment might be different to that which we have observed in the 'hard' sciences. We contend that the locus of legitimate interpretation of Big Data biology and physics is tightly delineated, found within the disciplinary institutions and cultures of these disciplines. We suggest that when using Big Data to make knowledge claims about 'the social' the locus of legitimate interpretation is more diffuse, with knowledge claims that are treated as being credible made from other disciplines, or even by those outside academia entirely.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Thoughts On the Social Sciences Computational Social Science And The Locus Of Legitimate Interpretationmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The locus of legitimate interpretation in Big Data sciences: Lessons for computational social science from -omic biology and high-energy physics

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although the sociology of science has primarily been oriented towards publicly funded research, some attention has been paid to issues raised by corporate actors [23,24]. Recent work by the first author has addressed ‘fringe’ science—that is, science conducted at significant social and conceptual distance from the core of the research community [25,26], though not which was corporate sponsored.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing violence to evidence on violence? How the alcohol industry created doubt in order to influence policy

Bartlett

McCambridge

2021

Drug and Alcohol Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In 2015/2016 controversy followed the publication of a report on an anthropological study of Australian and New Zealand night‐time economies funded by a major alcohol producer. This paper explores the background, moments of public controversy and political uses of the report. Methods Informed by the sociology of scientific controversies, we review the available relevant work of the author of the report, associated material such as press releases, newspaper articles (n = 18) and industry submissions to government (n = 12). Attention was paid to the ways in which claims were made about the relationship between alcohol and violence, and the ways in which credibility and legitimacy were constructed. Results The author of the report has longstanding associations with alcohol industry organisations. Claims made regarding alcohol and violence have remained highly consistent over time, and appear oblivious to developments in the evidence. In the media, the story was largely framed as a contest of credibility between compromised parties. The report continues to be used in alcohol industry submissions to government. Discussion and Conclusions This analysis suggests that this is a ‘counterfeit scientific controversy’; in our assessment, the report has had value not as a contribution to the scientific literature, but as a resource in the claims‐making practices of the alcohol industry. Studies of the ways in which industry actors foster science‐related content conducted at significant social and conceptual distance from the core of the relevant research community will enhance understandings of the ways in which industry actors engage with science and policy.

show abstract

“…30 Progress in Physics has been identified as a ''fringe'' scientific publication that ''encourages pathological individualism'' and ''will consider all work without regard to affiliations.'' 31 Nevertheless, ''the papers it publishes have all the appearance of scientific papers.'' 32 Wikipedia categorizes Progress in Physics as a ''fringe science journal.''…”

Section: Us Patents On Applications Of Quantum Entanglementmentioning

confidence: 99%

In re Huping Hu: Quantum Entanglement, Medical Innovation, and Patentability on the Scientific “Fringe”

2021

Biotechnology Law Report

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Demarcating Fringe Science for Policy

Cited by 27 publications

References 23 publications

The locus of legitimate interpretation in Big Data sciences: Lessons for computational social science from -omic biology and high-energy physics

The locus of legitimate interpretation in Big Data sciences: Lessons for computational social science from -omic biology and high-energy physics

Doing violence to evidence on violence? How the alcohol industry created doubt in order to influence policy

In re Huping Hu: Quantum Entanglement, Medical Innovation, and Patentability on the Scientific “Fringe”

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About