Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Social Studies of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rees, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Practising Infanticide, Observing Narrative

Controversial Texts in a Field Science

Amanda Rees

Department of Sociology, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD; fax: +44 1904 433043; ar24{at}york.ac.uk

In recent years, social studies of science have developed a deep interest in the conduct of science in the field. However, studies of controversial field science remain relatively rare. This paper presents an analysis of a controversy about the origin of primate infanticide that began in the 1970s, and discusses the ways in which controversies in the field differ from those in the laboratory. Particularly important here is the inability of researchers to control the behaviour of their research subjects; to an important extent, the conduct of their research is dependent on the agency of their research subjects. Finally, it also points to the rôle played by the sciences of animal behaviour in the constructions of stories about the biological basis of human culture, a rôle that means that the investigation of controversy in these sciences is of paramount public importance.

Key Words: anthropocentrism • closure • ethology • experiment • primates • trust

Social Studies of Science, Vol. 31, No. 4, 507-531 (2001)
DOI: 10.1177/030631201031004002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Social Studies of ScienceHome page
A. Rees
Reflections on the Field: Primatology, Popular Science and the Politics of Personhood
Social Studies of Science, December 1, 2007; 37(6): 881 - 907.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 SociologyHome page
S. Jackson and A. Rees
The Appalling Appeal of Nature: The Popular Influence of Evolutionary Psychology as a Problem for Sociology
Sociology, October 1, 2007; 41(5): 917 - 930.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Public Understanding of ScienceHome page
A. Cassidy
Evolutionary psychology as public science and boundary work
Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2006; 15(2): 175 - 205.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Social Studies of ScienceHome page
T. F. Gieryn
City as Truth-Spot: Laboratories and Field-Sites in Urban Studies
Social Studies of Science, February 1, 2006; 36(1): 5 - 38.
[Abstract] [PDF]