For a Sociology of Expertise: The Social Origins of the Autism Epidemic

Abstract

This article endeavors to replace the sociology of professions with the more comprehensive and timely sociology of expertise. It suggests that we need to distinguish between experts and expertise as requiring two distinct modes of analysis that are not reducible to one another. It analyzes expertise as a network linking together agents, devices, concepts, and institutional and spatial arrangements. It also suggests rethinking how abstraction and power were analyzed in the sociology of professions. The utility of this approach is demonstrated by using it to explain the recent precipitous rise in autism diagnoses. This article shows that autism remained a rare disorder until the deinstitutionalization of mental retardation created a new institutional matrix within which a new set of actors-the parents of children with autism in alliance with psychologists and therapists-were able to forge an alternative network of expertise.In his seminal The System of Professions, Andrew Abbott ð1988, pp. 2-3, 9-20Þ criticized the mode of narration prevalent in the sociology of professions, which followed the ideal typical "life history" of a profession. Abbott called instead for a history not of groups but of "tasks and problems" ðp. 314Þ, a history without a protagonist in the sense that the story it told would not be governed by projecting backward the necessary formation of

Rethinking construction expertise with posthumanism

“…For Latour (1987) these metrological claims, these measuring devices, which are part human, part nonhuman, are integral to our agency, and especially our expertise, defined simply as an efficacy to accomplish a task, faster and better (Eyal, 2013). As he explains 'What we call "thinking with accuracy" in a situation of controversy is always bringing to the surface one of these forms.…”

“…professional bodies, royal charters and the law) but also processes of extension, dialogue and collaboration. As Eyal (2013), via Latour, explains: a network of expertise ... becomes more powerful and influential by virtue of its capacity to craft and package its concepts, its discourse, its modes of seeing, doing, and judging, so they can be grafted onto what others are doing, thus linking them to the network and eliciting their cooperation (p876). Latour (1987) differs from Haraway and Brandiotti, in that his contribution to an analysis of expertise offers a less political and ethical emphasis, yet he shares their interest in understanding what might be termed our posthuman condition.…”

“…as suggested by much sociological writing on expertise (Evetts, 2006;Friedson, 2001;Knapp, 1999;Larson, 1977), they are also mediated through a networked array of nonhuman actors such as documents, bureaucracies, and other standardizing technologies through which expertise can be consistently measured. And importantly, as Latour (1987) explains, the larger this network is, the more powerful a particular strand of expertise becomes (see Eyal, 2013). Moreover, as this network of standardization expands, and is taken-for-granted, it disappears from view so that it 'makes it appear as if expertise is embodied 'by the expert'" (Eyal, 2013: 871).…”

“…(Eyal, 2013) Within psychology, well-cited theories of expertise, such as those developed by Karl Anders…”

Managing uncertainty: Forest professionals’ claim and epistemic authority in the face of societal and climate change

“…In addition, professions are attached to a body of knowledge; to become part of a profession, a candidate must prove that he or she has acquired certain knowledge relevant for the profession (in most cases through an educational programme at the university level) (Pfadenhauer, 2006). This focus implies that organizational dimensions are made central, how educational programs are developed, associations formed, professional jurisdictions and legal mandates negotiated, and organizational boundaries drawn (Eyal, 2013). The contentwhat professionals actually do, how they make use of knowledge and how they address competing knowledge claims -is much less researched.…”