Social Epigenetics: A Science of Social Science?

Chung, Emma; Cromby, John; Papadopoulos, Dimitris N.; Tufarelli, Cristina

doi:10.1111/2059-7932.12019

Cited by 34 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The idea of the “social epigenome as a conceptual space,” in which the “inert genome is supplemented by a softer, more adaptable epigenome” that is capable of responding to the environment, is elaborated in [ 22 ]. According to the authors, psychologists and sociologists, the ‘epigenome’ describes the overall state of a cell in flux, each point in time yielding multiple cascading possibilities for divergence of individual phenotypes.” The ‘social epigenome’ is defined as the myriad miniscule interactions that are at once socioculturally and materially, relationally and biologically situated.…”

Section: The Emergence and Far-reaching Claims Of “Social Epigeneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context

Deichmann

2020

Epigenetics & Chromatin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epigenetics researchers in developmental, cell, and molecular biology greatly diverge in their understanding and definitions of epigenetics. In contrast, social epigeneticists, e.g., sociologists, scholars of STS, and behavioural scientists, share a focus and definition of epigenetics that is environmentally caused and trans-generationally inherited. This article demonstrates that this emphasis on the environment and on so-called Lamarckian inheritance, in addition to other factors, reflects an interdisciplinary power struggle with genetics, in which epigenetics appears to grant the social sciences a higher epistemic status. Social scientists’ understanding of epigenetics, thus, appears in part to be socially constructed, i.e., the result of extra-scientific factors, such as social processes and the self-interest of the discipline. This article argues that social epigeneticists make far-reaching claims by selecting elements from research labelled epigenetics in biology while ignoring widely confirmed scientific facts in genetics and cell biology, such as the dependence of epigenetic marks on DNA sequence-specific events, or the lack of evidence for the lasting influence of the environment on epigenetic marks or the epigenome. Moreover, they treat as a given crucial questions that are far from resolved, such as what role, if any, DNA methylation plays in the complex biochemical system of regulating gene activity. The article also points out incorrect perceptions and media hypes among biological epigeneticists and calls attention to an apparent bias among scientific journals that prefer papers that promote transgenerational epigenetic inheritance over articles that critique it. The article concludes that while research labelled epigenetics contributes significantly to our knowledge about chromatin and the genome, it does not, as is often claimed, rehabilitate Lamarck or overthrow the fundamental biological principles of gene regulation, which are based on specific regulatory sequences of the genome.

show abstract

Section: The Emergence and Far-reaching Claims Of “Social Epigeneticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context

Deichmann

2020

Epigenetics & Chromatin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The idea of the "social epigenome as a conceptual space," in which the "inert genome is supplemented by a softer, more adaptable epigenome" that is capable of responding to the environment, is elaborated in [22]. According to the authors, psychologists and sociologists, the 'epigenome' describes the overall state of a cell in ux, each point in time yielding multiple cascading possibilities for divergence of individual phenotypes."…”

Section: The Emergence and Far-reaching Claims Of "Social Epigenetics"mentioning

confidence: 99%

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context

deichmann¹

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epigenetics researchers in developmental, cell, and molecular biology greatly diverge in their understanding and definitions of epigenetics. In contrast, social epigeneticists, e.g. sociologists, scholars of STS, and behavioural scientists, share a focus and definition of epigenetics that is environmentally-caused and trans-generationally inherited. This article demonstrates that this emphasis on the environment and on so-called Lamarckian inheritance, in addition to other factors, reflects an interdisciplinary power struggle with genetics, in which epigenetics appears to grant the social sciences a higher epistemic status. Social scientists' understanding of epigenetics thus appears in part to be socially constructed, i.e. the result of extra-scientific factors, such as social processes and the self-interest of the discipline. This article argues that social epigeneticists make far-reaching claims by selecting elements from research labelled epigenetics in biology while ignoring widely confirmed scientific facts in genetics and cell biology, such as the dependence of epigenetic marks on DNA sequence specific events, or the lack of evidence for the lasting influence of the environment on epigenetic marks or the epigenome. Moreover, they treat as a given crucial questions that are far from resolved, such as what role, if any, DNA methylation plays in the complex biochemical system of regulating gene activity. The article also points out incorrect perceptions and media hypes among biological epigeneticists and calls attention to an apparent bias among scientific journals that prefer papers that promote transgenerational epigenetic inheritance over articles that critique it. The article concludes that while research labelled epigenetics contributes significantly to our knowledge about chromatin and the genome, it does not, as is often claimed, rehabilitate Lamarck or overthrow the fundamental biological principles of gene regulation, which are based on specific regulatory sequences of the genome.

show abstract

“…Biosocial research is an emergent field that combines expertise and perspectival understandings from the biological and social sciences (Chung, Cromby & Papado poulos, 2016;Chung, Cromby, Papadopoulos & Tufarelli, 2016). The field has sprung out of a paradigm shift, with new technologies and findings from the fields of neu roscience and epigenetics revealing a paradigm of nonreductive biological sciences (Rose, 2013) in which the biological is not a blue-print, but a starting point.…”

Section: Biosocial Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climbing, Hiding and Having Fun: Schoolchildren’s Memories of Holistic Learning in a Norwegian Kindergarten

Aslanian

Andresen

Baasland

2020

nse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Firmly planted in the Nordic tradition, policies that guide practice in Norwegian kindergartens emphasize a holistic approach that integrates care, play and learning and promotes well-being and development through relationships and experiences in the natural environment. While the holistic approach enjoys support both politically and within the profession, a political call for increased learning has resulted in a number of programs embracing school-based methods of learning infusing the field. The aim to increase learning has increasingly relied on a concept of learning that is the result of intentional pedagogic practice and high quality engagement between educators and children. This understanding of learning does not embrace learning related to children as biological beings in a vital phase of growth; that occurs outside of situations crafted to be learning situations. In this article, we address learning as a biological and social phenomenon, and consider how schoolchildren’s recollections of life in kindergarten can shed light on how and what children learn in the unique learning environments of Norwegian kindergartens. Our approach offers an opportunity to understand what holistic learning in ECEC can mean for children as biosocial beings.

show abstract

Social Epigenetics: A Science of Social Science?

Cited by 34 publications

References 35 publications

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context

The social construction of the social epigenome and the larger biological context

Climbing, Hiding and Having Fun: Schoolchildren’s Memories of Holistic Learning in a Norwegian Kindergarten

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About