Search

This paper has benefited greatly from the time that I have recently spent working on the Committee of Section H of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. I am particularly grateful to David Shankland and Malcolm Smith, both of whom have served as Recorders for Section H, for generously sharing their knowledge and reminiscences of the Section with me. The paper further benefited from comments received at the recent 2004 Festival of Science in Exeter at which I presented it in a session entitled‘Anthropology after Darwin: The role of the BA’. I also acknowledge the helpful comments of three anonymous reviewers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Explanatory accounts of the emergence, spread, storage, persistence, and transformation of knowledge face numerous theoretical and methodological challenges. This paper argues that although anthropologists are uniquely positioned to address some of these challenges, joint engagement with relevant research in neighbouring disciplines holds considerable promise for advancement in the area. Researchers across the human and social sciences are increasingly recognizing the importance of conjointly operative and mutually contingent bodily, cognitive, neural, and social mechanisms informing the generation and communication of knowledge. Selected cognitive scientific work, in particular, is reviewed here and used to illustrate how anthropology may potentially richly contribute not only to descriptive and interpretive endeavours, but to the development and substantiation of explanatory accounts also. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social scientists have expressed strong views on corporate influences over science, but most attention has been devoted to broad, Black/White arguments, rather than to actual mechanisms of influence. This paper summarizes an experience where involvement in a lawsuit led to the discovery of an unexpected mechanism: A large corporation facing a multibillion-dollar court judgment quietly provided generous funding to well-known scientists (including at least one Nobel prize winner) who would submit articles to “open,” peer-reviewed journals, so that their “unbiased science” could be cited in an appeal to the Supreme Court. On balance, the corporation’s most effective techniques of influence may have been provided not by overt pressure, but by encouraging scientists to continue thinking of themselves as independent and impartial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Until quite recently, questionnaire surveys, semi-structured interviews and the gathering and interpreting of various documents have been the main kinds of empirical research to be found in French sociology. Observation plays a leading role in none of them, even in the latter. The researchers who use it do not seem convinced of its legitimacy, because what can be expected from systematic observation does not fit the prevailing purpose of developing abstract, general theories. After having sketched out the institutional and intellectual background, this paper examines a few examples of French studies using observation. Most of them fail to clearly distinguish between indirect evidence and direct observation, between meaning as construed by the observer and that experienced by the people observed; they rarely report dated and situated facts (even more seldom behaviors than settings), and they replace the expected analyses of these messing facts with the interpretation of would-be typical or usual facts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the basis of citations to articles in regional science journals, this study identifies the most influential scholars in the field during various periods of its first-half century. It distinguishes among the pioneering generation who wrote its formative pieces, the generations who expanded its boundaries, and the current generation whose work is shaping the field and giving it direction. Useful insights into the nature of regional science flow from key facts about its intellectual leaders, including their disciplinary affiliations, periods of active research, and cited work outside the regional science journals. The article also discusses problems with the citation data and limitations of citation studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]