All That Is Solid.
The belief that natural sciences are more scientific than the social sciences has been well documented in the perceptions of both lay and scientific populations. Influenced by the Kuhnian concept of “paradigm development” and empirical studies on the closure of scientific controversies, scholars fro...
| Publicado en: | American Sociological Review Vol. 80; no. 6; pp. 1201 - 1226 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Sage Publications Inc.
Dec2015
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=111202460&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 111202460 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00031224 ASC jtl: American Sociological Review issn: 00031224 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Dec2015 vid: 80 iid: 6 pid: 344 pub: Sage Publications Inc. artinfo: ui: 111202460 10.1177/0003122415607230 ppf: 1201 ppct: 25 formats: tig: atl: All That Is Solid. aug: au: Peterson, David affil: Northwestern University su: United States Psychology Universities & colleges Interviewing Ethnology research Comparative studies Benchmark problems (Computer science) Molecular biology Research methodology evaluation Research Research methodology Content mining Standards sug: subj: Psychology Universities & colleges Interviewing Ethnology research United States Colleges, Universities, and Professional Schools Comparative studies Benchmark problems (Computer science) Molecular biology Research methodology evaluation Research Research methodology Content mining Standards keyword: hierarchy of the sciences laboratory ethnography science and knowledge scientific frontier hierarchy of the sciences laboratory ethnography science and knowledge scientific frontier ab: The belief that natural sciences are more scientific than the social sciences has been well documented in the perceptions of both lay and scientific populations. Influenced by the Kuhnian concept of “paradigm development” and empirical studies on the closure of scientific controversies, scholars from divergent traditions associate scientific development with increased consensus and stability. However, both the macro/quantitative and micro/qualitative approaches are limited in key ways. This article is the first comparative ethnography of a natural science (molecular biology) and a social science (psychology) and it highlights important differences between the fields. Molecular biologists engage in a process of “bench-building,” in which they create and integrate new manipulation techniques and technologies into their practice, whereas psychologists have far less opportunity for this type of development. This suggests an alternative conception of the natural/social divide, in which the natural sciences are defined by dynamic material evolution while the social sciences remain relatively stable. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|