Co-constructing controversy: content analysis of collaborative knowledge negotiation in online communities

Knowledge sharing online has flourished within organizations as well as open online communities due to the pervasiveness of Web 2.0 platforms. This paper builds on previous studies of social construction of knowledge online and investigates how contributors in online communities collaboratively share and construct controversial scientific knowledge. As the general public participates in such knowledge collaboration, understanding the processes through which they contribute content and roles that they play is imperative. The authors conducted the content analysis of three online communities that engage in knowledge collaboration on the subject of Measles, Mumps, and Rubella (MMR) vaccination, which is perceived as contentious knowledge by the public due to the widespread myth among parents that the MMR vaccine is associated with autism. The study's findings include that the content discussed is influenced by the purposes of the communities, nature of the tasks, and demographics of participants, although they discussed the same topic. The authors also found that the framework of knowledge reuse and knowledge co-construction sites is useful for investigating the content and roles that appeared in the three communities. The contribution of the paper includes the analytical framework of knowledge reuse and knowledge co-construction, articulation of the content and roles that appeared in online communities, and unboxing of discourses in three different online communities. Future research directions are also discussed.     

Evaluating social science and humanities knowledge production: an exploratory analysis of dynamics in science systems

Knowledge is gaining increasing importance in modern-day society as a factor of production and, ultimately, growth. This article explores the dynamics in university knowledge production and its effect on the state of university–industry–policy exchange in the Netherlands. Science systems are said to be in transformation. The university has evolved from performing conventional research and educational functions to serving as an innovation-promoting knowledge hub; dynamics that have received mixed reactions. The social sciences and humanities (SSH) take a special position, insofar as their focus seems primarily to be placed on conventional research and educational functions, and not directly on (commercial) valorization. Societal changes are, however, pressing for a reconsideration of the role of SSH. In our article, we distinguish between three important new movements that seem to be affecting SSH. It is believed that these movements, which are already having an impact today, will considerably influence SSH in the future. These developments are further differentiation, synthesis between the various subdisciplines of SSH and the natural sciences, and shifts in paradigms. The aims of this article are twofold: (1) to assess what is believed to be the most likely development of SSH by means of discovering relevant subsets of factors influencing university knowledge production; and (2) to discover whether the knowledge production factors show characteristics of a general development similar to the “Mode 2” concept. A systematic qualitative database was created by means of 22 semi-structured personal interviews with key representatives from business, university and the policy sector. Our explanatory framework employs an artificial intelligence method, i.e. rough set analysis. On the basis of these results, we find that a small minority of the respondents prefers a closer relationship of SSH to society, government and industry, and other institutional centers of authority, whilst interdisciplinarity in particular is regarded as having an overall positive influence on the future of SSH in the Netherlands. Consequently, the idea of a clear distinction between Mode 1 and Mode 2 knowledge production, i.e. traditional knowledge and knowledge carried out in the context of application, is not supported by our data.     

Seeing the system: Systemic gender knowledge to support transformational change towards gender equality in science

Scholars agree that gender inequality is systemic and that participants in gender equality interventions need knowledge on gender inequality processes. However, a detailed view on the specific characteristics of this knowledge is as yet missing. This article aims to contribute to gender equality interventions by conceptualizing and visualizing systemic gender knowledge as an important condition for transformational change. Combining gender and participatory system dynamics literature, this article first introduces the concept of systemic gender knowledge. This concept captures two main characteristics that make gender knowledge systemic: knowledge on the interaction of gender inequality processes and endogenous thinking, here implying a focus on the organization as the relevant level of analysis. In addition to this conceptual contribution, the research contributes methodologically to the gender inequality intervention literature by designing a visualization process, translating written texts into system dynamics models which enable exploration of systemic gender knowledge. Finally, the research contributes empirically by exploring the systemic gender knowledge of participants in two science research institutes of a Dutch university, finding shifts in both characteristics of systemic gender knowledge. This enables researchers to discern whether gender equality interventions lead to increases in systemic gender knowledge, thus supporting transformational change.     

Rethinking the science-policy nexus: from knowledge utilization and science technology studies to types of boundary arrangements

The relationship between political judgment and science-based expertise is a troubled one. In the media three cliché images compete. The business-as-usual political story is that, in spite of appearances to the contrary, politics is safely on top and experts are still on tap. The story told by scientists is that power-less but inventive scholars only speak truth to power. But there is plenty of room for a more cynical interpretation. It sees scientific advisers as following their own interests, unless better paid by other interests, and politicians as asking for advice only to support and legitimize their pre-formed political decisions. To the extent this cynical perspective gains ascendancy, politics and science lose credibility. If we think the three clichés cloak a more complex reality, we should embark upon a quest for other, possibly better models of the science/politics nexus. That is exactly the purpose of this article. Its claim is that a mutual transgression of the knowledge utilization strand of research in policy studies and the study of science, technology and society will provide us with more sophisticated images of science/politics boundary arrangements. Building upon Habermas well-known distinctions and Wittrocks historical-institutional approach in the construction of a property space, eight models are presented. We should try to discover the conditions under which some of these models may claim greater verisimilitude. This may allow us to rethink the role of scientific expertise in policymaking and generate a model that guides experts and policymakers (and perhaps other stakeholders as well) in their day-to-day boundary work.

---

Zusammenfassung Die Beziehung zwischen politischem Urteil und wissenschaftlicher Expertise ist problematisch. In den Medien wetteifern heute drei Klischees dazu. Allem gegenteiligen Anschein zum Trotz ist die Sichtweise der Politik gewöhnlich, dass sie sicher alle Fäden in der Hand hält und die Experten auf Abruf bereitstehen. Wissenschaftler vertreten dagegen die Auffassung, sie seien machtlose, wenngleich erfindungsreiche Gelehrte, die lediglich den Mächtigen die Wahrheit sagen. Daneben ist jedoch reichlich Raum für eine zynischere Betrachtungsweise, nach der wissenschaftliche Berater ihre eigenen Interessen verfolgen, sofern andere Interessen sie nicht besser bezahlen, und Politiker nur solchen Rat suchen, der ihre vorgefassten politischen Entscheidungen stützt und legitimiert. In dem Maße, wie diese zynische Sicht die Oberhand gewinnt, verlieren Politik und Wissenschaft an Glaubwürdigkeit. Wenn wir jedoch meinen, dass diese drei Klischees eine komplexere Realität verhüllen, dann sollten wir nach anderen, möglicherweise besseren Modellen für den Nexus zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik suchen. Genau darauf zielt dieser Artikel ab. Wir behaupten, dass ein beidseitiges Überschreiten des Forschungsansatzes zur Wissensanwendung in den Politikwissenschaften und in der wissenschaftlichen Betrachtung von Naturwissenschaft, Technologie und Gesellschaft hochauflösendere Bilder von den Verhältnissen an der Grenze zwischen Wissenschaft und Politik liefert. Wir präsentieren acht Modelle, aufbauend auf Habermas bekannten Unterscheidungen und Wittrocks historisch-instutionellem Ansatz zur Konstruktion eines Eigenschaftsraums. Wir sollten nach den Bedingungen suchen, unter denen manche dieser Modelle eine größere Wahrheitsnähe für sich beanspruchen können. Dies könnte uns ermöglichen, die Rolle wissenschaftlicher Expertise bei politischen Entscheidungsprozessen neu zu überdenken und ein Modell zu schaffen, an dem sich Experten und politische Entscheidungsträger (und vielleicht auch andere Beteiligte) in ihrer täglichen Arbeit im fraglichen Grenzbereich orientieren können.

---

Résumé La relation entre le jugement politique et lexpertise à fondement scientifique est problématique. Dans les médias, trois clichés se disputent la première place. Même si les apparences indiquent le contraire, le langage du monde politique montre que ce dernier tient les rênes et que les experts doivent répondre à lappel. Le message diffusé par les scientifiques consiste à dire quils sont des érudits certes sans pouvoir mais ingénieux, qui se contentent de «dire la vérité aux puissants». Mais ceci laisse assez de place à une interprétation plus cynique, suivant laquelle les conseillers scientifiques poursuivent leurs propres intérêts, à moins que dautres intérêts ne les rémunèrent mieux; et les hommes politiques ne leur demandent leur avis que pour étayer et légitimer les décisions politiques quils ont déjà prises. La politique et la science perdent de leur crédibilité à mesure que cette vision cynique gagne du terrain. Si nous pensons que ces trois clichés cachent une réalité plus complexe, il nous faudra chercher dautres modèles, meilleurs si possible, pour la connexion entre science et politique. Tel est exactement lobjectif de cet article. Il affirme quune transgression mutuelle des filières dutilisation du savoir dans la recherche en sciences politiques et létude de la science, de la technologie et de la socièté nous fournira un tableau plus complexe des rapports en présence sur les lignes de démarcation entre science et politique. Il présente huit modèles sur la base des distinctions bien connues dHabermas et de lapproche historico-institutionnelle de Wittrock sur la construction dun espace de propriété. Nous devrions rechercher les conditions dans lesquelles certains de ces modèles peuvent se targuer dêtre très vraisemblables. Ceci nous permettrait de repenser le rôle de lexpertise scientifique dans la production politique et de créer un modèle capable de guider les experts et les politiques (et peut-être aussi dautres intéressés) dans leur travail quotidien aux frontières de ces deux domaines.

     

Protected areas in the periphery: Conservation and controversy in northern Scotland

Controversies arising from the notification of large areas of land as Sites of Special Scientific Interest in northern Scotland are reviewed against the background of surveys of land occupiers' experiences on the one hand, and of trends in conservation thinking in the wider world on the other. Most of the protected area is of low capability for productive land use, and there is little evidence of adverse trends in labour and employment on SSSIs compared with similar, non-SSSI land. Site designation has in practice impeded land management in the cases of relatively few land occupiers, but rather more have negative attitudes towards it. It is concluded that some elements of the ‘scientific colonialism’ model of protected areas can be detected.     

Epistemic modesty,ostentatiousness and the uncertainties of epigenetics: on the knowledge machinery of (social) science

Epigenetic processes are garnering attention in the social sciences, where some scholars assert their importance for theorizing social life. I engage with such ideas here by drawing on interviews with leading bioscientists. To begin with, I underscore the (productive) uncertainties of those working in and around epigenetics; I describe these as a manifestation of ‘epistemic modesty’, and suggest that dissensus helps to propel biomedical innovation. Then, drawing on the concept of ‘alien science’, I detail some researchers’ ambivalences regarding the notion of ‘transgenerational inheritance’; their dissatisfaction with the (public) communication practices of other scientists (situated in what I term a regime of ‘epistemic ostentatiousness’); and the challenges faced when moderating societal discussion of epigenetics in ways that expand excitement whilst deflating (what researchers regard as) unrealistic expectations. The paper concludes with reflections on the knowledge machinery of the (social) sciences, and employs the study data to interrogate sociological engagements with epigenetics.     

Implants and ethnocide: learning from the cochlear implant controversy

This paper uses the fictional case of the ‘Babel fish’ to explore and illustrate the issues involved in the controversy about the use of cochlear implants in prelinguistically deaf children. Analysis of this controversy suggests that the development of genetic tests for deafness poses a serious threat to the continued flourishing of Deaf culture. I argue that the relationships between Deaf and hearing cultures that are revealed and constructed in debates about genetic testing are themselves deserving of ethical evaluation. Making good policy about genetic testing for deafness will require addressing questions in political philosophy and anthropology about the value of culture and also thinking hard about what sorts of experiences and achievements make a human life worthwhile.     

Image repair in late night comedy: Letterman and the Palin joke controversy

David Letterman, host of The Late Show, told a joke about Sarah Palin's daughter during one of his nightly monologues. During the ensuing controversy, Letterman offered two extended statements about the joke. Approaching Letterman's responses from the perspective of Benoit's image repair typology reveals three primary strategies: denial, mortification, and corrective action. While Letterman's first attempt to resolve the controversy failed, his second attempt was largely successful. Implications for public relations image repair strategies are offered.     

Aiming for the discursive high ground: Monsanto and the biotechnology controversy

The past several years have seen the publication of a great deal of exciting theoretical work on ideology and discourse. There has, however, been much less empirical work in the area. In this essay, we undertake a study of a specific set of discursive products developed by Monsanto Corporation in its efforts to shape public opinion and the terms of debate in the controversy over the development of biotechnology. Drawing on existing work, we suggest that relationships between signifiers and signifieds are not natural, but social creations, and that the creation of signs is often the product of social struggles. We show how Monsanto has drawn on discursive elements with historical resonance to create an image of biotechnology that the company hopes will lead to public support for the technology or, at the very least, will stifle opposition.     

Knowledge,boundaries, and bodies: Social construction between medical sociology and science and technology studies

Medical sociology and science and technology studies (STS) emerged from different positions, but often closely related concerns, within the broad discipline of sociology. Their interface and areas of overlap have mostly been shaped by theoretical positions broadly considered “social constructionist.” Taken together, these perspectives provide empirical and theoretical tools to analyze important questions about how social inequalities, forms of scientific knowledge, and patterns of human health come to be produced and feedback into one another. Examining their intersection enables sociological questions such as: How is medical and public health scientific knowledge produced, stabilized, and taken as fact? How are scientific facts about health and illness used, experienced, and challenged? What is the relationship between health inequalities and public health or medical knowledge? This article seeks to briefly trace the important contributions that social constructionist research has made at the interstices of medical sociology and STS, further clarifying the history, points of intersection, and areas of diversion between them. The current COVID-19 pandemic has unveiled the political struggles that constitute public health scientific knowledge and circulation. The interface between STS and medical sociology can help us to make sense of the interrelationships between politics, power inequalities, and public health scientific knowledge.     

The status offender controversy: charges and study evidence

Critics of public policy on status offenders urge that PINS statutes be abolished as racially discriminatory in its target population, as bureaucratically coercive in its labeling of normal children, as undemocratic in lacking the "will and consent" of those whom it presumably serves, and unnecessary in that the social welfare marketplace provides a better service alternative. This report of a study on PINS intake cases in Manhattan finds that the data do not support the charges.     

Beyond dialogue and antagonism: a Bakhtinian perspective on the controversy in political theory

The aim of the article is to show that the contradiction between dialogue and antagonism can be overcome with the help of the idea of dialogue as developed by the Russian thinker Mikhail Bakhtin. The lack of such theory led to the rejection of liberalism or to the introduction of dialogical principle into the body of liberal politics. It was Jürgen Habermas who first understood the necessity of dialogical consensus as the basis of liberal democracy. On the other hand, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe developed the concept of agonistic democracy, claiming that conflict is inevitable in liberal democracy because consensual relations cannot harmonize contradictory political identities. The second part of the article is the elaboration of Bakhtin’s theory of dialogue and its relevance for political theory. The main point is that dialogue leads to better understanding but not necessarily to consensus. If this is so, then both conceptions of the political are moments in never-ending dialogical relations. The significance of Bakhtin’s idea of dialogue for political theory consists thus in the recognition of the inevitable dialogical nature of society. However, this dialogical concept also has a normative character. Society has to find a balance between two extremes: excessive dialogue, which leads to anarchy, and the lack of dialogue, which leads to totalitarianism.     

The Medicare assignment controversy: the construction of public-professional conflict

The conflict between the elderly and organized medicine over "mandatory assignment" and "balance billing" is a significant public policy issue. Considerable ideological importance has been attached to this conflict by both sides, despite the relatively modest proportion of total revenue for physician services received through balance billing in payment for care of Medicare beneficiaries. The positions of these two coalitions are examined as well as the efforts of the Physician Payment Review Commission (PPRC) to craft a public policy response. Three alternative resolutions--those adopted by Congress in 1989 on the recommendation of the PPRC, the Canadian solution, and actions taken on a state level--are then contrasted. The concentrated impact on the elderly of balance billing practices is considered as a problem, especially for elderly of limited income and resources. Justification of the practice is typically provided by the profession on the ideological grounds of preservation of professional autonomy rather than economic gain, which also reflects the current relatively limited use of balance billing; a significant majority of all claims submitted in the United States are now assigned to physicians. A continuation of the gradualist strategy of the PPRC is endorsed as the most appropriate short-range solution to these problems, which diminish in significance with a more comprehensive national health financing scheme.     

To Life: Optimism Bias and Technological Ties in the Face of the Worst

This essay addresses a recent media controversy. Two journalists actively questioned the appropriateness of a popular blog that chronicles a young woman's fight with cancer. Elaine Replogle ( 2014 ) unfolds the facts of this case and discusses the role of fame and status in understanding the journalists' response to the blog. Here, I extend that conversation, exploring how our culture's optimism bias, as well as the increasing importance of our technological ties, informs our understanding of both the blog and its critics.