Sociology of Science

Edited by Markus Seidel (University of Münster)
Assistant editor: Charlott Becker (University of Münster)
About this topic
Summary Sociology of Science aims at an understanding of the social aspects of science. It comprises research about the social structure of the institutions of science and their relationship to other institutions as well as the influence on and construction of scientific knowledge.
Key works Barnes et al 1996 states the prominent 'Strong programme', Collins 1985 presents the sociology of science of the so-called 'Bath school', Fleck 1979 is an early classic in sociology of science, In Latour & Woolgar 1986 a constructivist approach in the sociology of science is defended, Merton 1973 is a collection of key essays by probably the most prominent sociologist of science, De Solla Price is one of the founding fathers of scientometrics , In Shapin & Schaffer 1989, you find an influential case study
Introductions Barnes et al 1996 can be read as an introduction to the field, Helen Longino's article in the Stanford Encyclopedia provides introductory insight in the social dimensions of scientific knowledge
Related categories

2571 found
1 — 50 / 2571
  1. The Love of Neuroscience: A Sociological Account.Gabriel Abend - 2018 - Sociological Theory 36 (1):88-116.
    I make a contribution to the sociology of epistemologies by examining the neuroscience literature on love from 2000 to 2016. I find that researchers make consequential assumptions concerning the production or generation of love, its temporality, its individual character, and appropriate control conditions. Next, I consider how to account for these assumptions’ being common in the literature. More generally, I’m interested in the ways in which epistemic communities construe, conceive of, and publicly represent and work with their objects of inquiry—and (...)
  2. Styles of Sociological Thought: Sociologies, Epistemologies, and the Mexican and U.S. Quests for Truth.Gabriel Abend - 2006 - Sociological Theory 24 (1):1-41.
    Both U.S. and Mexican sociologies allege that they are in the business of making true scientific knowledge claims about the social world. Conventional conceptions of science notwithstanding, I demonstrate that their claims to truth and scientificity are based on alternative epistemological grounds. Drawing a random sample of nonquantitative articles from four leading journals, I show that, first, they assign a different role to theories, and indeed they have dissimilar understandings of what a theory should consist of. Second, whereas U.S. sociology (...)
  3. Interpreting Mannheim.N. Abercrombie & B. Longhurst - 1983 - Theory, Culture and Society 2 (1):5-15.
  4. Class, Structure, and Knowledge Problems in the Sociology of Knowledge.Nicholas Abercrombie - 1980
  5. Misunderstanding the Merton Thesis: A Boundary Dispute Between History and Sociology.Gary A. Abraham - 1983 - Isis 74 (3):368-387.
  6. Issues in Science and Society.Emmanuel E. Achor - 2003 - Ap Express Publishers.
  7. Franco Ferrarotti and Italian Sociology.Sabino S. Acquaviva - forthcoming - Social Research.
  8. Show Us Your Traces: Traceability as a Measure for the Political Acceptability of Truth-Claims.Stephen Acreman - 2015 - Contemporary Political Theory 14 (3):197-212.
    This article considers some political potentialities of the post-constructivist proposal for substituting truth with traceability. Traceability is a measure of truthfulness in which the rationality of a truth-claim is found in accounting for the work done to maintain links back to an internal referent through a chain of mediations. The substitution of traceability for truth is seen as necessary to move the entire political domain towards a greater responsiveness to the events of the natural-social world. In particular, it seeks to (...)
  9. Vico in Context.A. M. Adam - 1993 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 23 (2):243.
  10. What Can the History of AI Learn From the History of Science?Alison E. Adam - 1990 - AI and Society 4 (3):232-241.
    There have been few attempts, so far, to document the history of artificial intelligence. It is argued that the “historical sociology of scientific knowledge” can provide a broad historiographical approach for the history of AI, particularly as it has proved fruitful within the history of science in recent years. The article shows how the sociology of knowledge can inform and enrich four types of project within the history of AI; organizational history; AI viewed as technology; AI viewed as cognitive science (...)
  11. Revisiting School Scientific Argumentation From the Perspective of the History and Philosophy of Science.Agustín Adúriz-Bravo - 2014 - In Michael R. Matthews (ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Springer. pp. 1443-1472.
    This chapter aims to revisit the notion of argumentation that is currently used in science education. After acknowledging a consolidated tendency of linguistics-based approaches to the study of ‘school scientific argumentation’, the chapter proposes to shift the interest towards an examination of the epistemic aspects of argumentation, i.e. those that derive from its central participation in science as a process and as a product. The premise of the chapter is that the contributions of the philosophy and history of science and (...)
  12. David Bloor.Lord Mansfield'S. Advice - 1982 - In Barry Barnes & David O. Edge (eds.), Science in Context: Readings in the Sociology of Science. MIT Press.
  13. Agassi, Tower,.Joseph Agassi - manuscript
    The thesis or theses I wish to present here may, and hopefully should, sound rather trivial. The public role which concerned philosophers should take these days, I suppose, is somewhat similar to the role of preachers in earlier days, namely to state what should be obvious and treated as obvious but is nonetheless systematically overlooked.
  14. Turner on Merton.Joseph Agassi - 2009 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 39 (2):284-293.
    Stephen Turner complains about weaknesses of Robert K. Merton's teachings without noticing that these are common. He puts down Merton's ideas despite his innovations, on the ground that they are not successful and not sufficiently revolutionary. The criteria by which he condemns Merton are too vague and too high. Merton's merit is in his having put the sociology of science on the map and drawn attention to the egalitarianism that was prominent in classical science and that is now diminished. Key (...)
  15. Nicholas Maxwell:Is Science Neurotic?:Is Science Neurotic?Joseph Agassi - 2008 - Philosophy of Science 75 (4):477-479.
  16. Towards Honest Public Relations of Science.Joseph Agassi - 1996 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 49:39-58.
  17. "The Uses of Experiment: Studies in the Natural Sciences", Edited by David Gooding, Trevor Pinch, and Simon Schaffer. [REVIEW]Joseph Agassi - 1992 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 22 (2):266.
  18. The Role of the Philosopher Among the Scientists: Nuisance or Necessity?Joseph Agassi - 1989 - Social Epistemology 3 (4):297 – 309.
    1. Where is the trouble? Let us take it for granted that a person can be interested in researches that go on in different fields, for example, in physics and in psychology. Undoubtedly, this will raise problems not shared by a person whose research is confined to one field only. There may be difficulty in deciding which of the two is that person's primary field of interest; members of his secondary field of interest may be flattered or feel slighted or (...)
  19. Symposium on the Role of the Philosopher Among the Scientists: Nuisance or Necessity? A Reply to Baigrie.Joseph Agassi - 1989 - Social Epistemology 3 (4):319.
  20. Technology, Philosophical and Social Aspects.Joseph Agassi - 1985
  21. III. The Cheapening of Science∗.Joseph Agassi - 1984 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 27 (1-4):166-172.
  22. How Technology Aids and Impedes the Growth of Science.Joseph Agassi - 1982 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:585 - 597.
    The vision of Horace, combining the sweet and the useful, is an expression of a sense of abundance. It came first and was than supported by Bacon's vision of a science-based technology. Later this was further backed by classical liberalism and by metaphysical progressivism. That technology may impede and even destroy science is obvious. Yet the danger is overlooked--with the aid of the vision of Horace and of neo-conservative (Popperian) politics and of neo-reactionary (Kuhnian) politics of science. The science of (...)
  23. Science and Society Studies in the Sociology of Science /Joseph Agassi. --. --.Joseph Agassi - 1981 - D. Reidel Pub. Co. Sold and Distributed in the U.S.A. And Canada by Kluwer Boston Inc., C1981.
  24. In Search of the Zeitgeist.Joseph Agassi - 1975 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 5 (3):339.
  25. Agassi's Alleged Arbitrariness.Joseph Agassi - 1971 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 2 (2):157.
  26. Science and Society: Studies in the Sociology of Science.Joseph Agassi, Robert S. Cohen & Marx W. Wartofsky - 1983 - Philosophy of Science 50 (2):345-346.
  27. Postponing the Postmodern Sociological Practices, Selves, and Theories.Ben Agger - 2002
  28. Public Sociology From Social Facts to Literary Acts.Ben Agger - 2000
  29. Critical Social Theories an Introduction.Ben Agger - 1998
  30. "Antipositivist Theories of the Sciences" by Norman Stockman.Ben Agger - 1987 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 17 (1):121.
  31. Space, Scale and Culture in Social Science.John Agnew - 1993 - In S. James & David Ley (eds.), Place/Culture/Representation. Routledge. pp. 251.
  32. Social Science as a Social Institution: "Neutrality and the Politics of Social Research".Fred D' Agostino - 1995 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 25 (3):396.
  33. Special Issue on “Cultural and Cognitive Dimensions of Innovation” Edited by Petra Ahrweiler and Riccardo Viale.Petra Ahrweiler - 2013 - Mind and Society 12 (1):5-10.
    The Special Issue is started with the observation that the tension of mind and society, i.e. cognitive and sociological/cultural dimensions in knowledge production and innovation, is a well-known topic of academic discourse in Science and Technology Studies. The introduction mentions some historical hallmarks of the involved perspectives and discussions to outline the background of the Special Issue. The purpose of its contributions, which are briefly presented at the end of the introduction, is to review this long-existing tension of cognitive and (...)
  34. Logical Reasoning in Science & Technology.Glen S. Aikenhead - 1991
  35. High‐School Graduates' Beliefs About Science‐Technology‐Society. III. Characteristics and Limitations of Scientific Knowledge. [REVIEW]Glen S. Aikenhead - 1987 - Science Education 71 (4):459-487.
  36. High‐School Graduates' Beliefs About Science‐Technology‐Society. I. Methods and Issues in Monitoring Student Views.Glen S. Aikenhead, Reg W. Fleming & Alan G. Ryan - 1987 - Science Education 71 (2):145-161.
  37. The Development of a New Instrument:'Views on Science—Technology—Society'(VOSTS).Glen S. Aikenhead & Alan G. Ryan - 1992 - Science Education 76 (5):477-491.
  38. Problemy Prognozirovaniia I Upravleniia Nauchno-Tekhnicheskim Progressom.Boris Vladimirovich Akhlibininskii - 1974 - Lenizdat.
  39. Social Influence on Physics and Mathematics: Local or Attributive?Murad D. Akhundov - 2005 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 36 (1):135-149.
    The article is devoted to the nature of science. To what extent are science and mathematics affected by the society in which they are developed? Philosophy of science has accepted the social influence on science, but limits it only to the context of discovery (a "locational" approach). An opposite "attributive" approach states that any part of science may be so influenced. L. Graham is sure that even the mathematical equations at the core of fundamental physical theories may display social attributes. (...)
  40. Race and the Race for the White House: On Social Research in the Age of Trump.Musa Al-Gharbi - 2018 - American Sociologist 32.
    As it became clear that Donald Trump had a real base of political support, even as analysts consistently underestimated his electoral prospects, they grew increasingly fascinated with the question of who was supporting him (and why). However, researchers have also tended to hold strong negative opinions about Trump, and have approached research with uncharitable priors about the kind of person who would support him and what they would be motivated by. This essay presents a series of case studies showing how (...)
  41. The Matryoshka-Concept: On the Interpretation of “Weltanschauung” by K. Mannheim. [REVIEW]Mirko Alagna - 2011 - Humana Mente 18.
  42. Methodology and Scientific Competition.Max Albert - 2011 - Episteme 8 (2):165-183.
    Why is the average quality of research in open science so high? The answer seems obvious. Science is highly competitive, and publishing high quality research is the way to rise to the top. Thus, researchers face strong incentives to produce high quality work. However, this is only part of the answer. High quality in science, after all, is what researchers in the relevant field consider to be high quality. Why and how do competing researchers coordinate on common quality standards? I (...)
  43. Managing the Planet.Peter Albertson & Margery Barnett (eds.) - 1972 - Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
  44. The Tragedy of the Common Reviewers: The Peer Review Process.Ulysses Paulino De Albuquerque - unknown
    The peer review process is the dominant system adopted in science to evaluate the quality of articles submitted for publication. Various social players are involved in this process, including authors, editors and reviewers. Much has been discussed about the need to improve the scientific quality of what is published. The main focus of these discussions has been the work of the authors. However, the editors and reviewers also fulfill an important role. In this opinion article, we discuss some proposals to (...)
  45. Deuxieme Congres International d'Esthetique Et de Science de l'Art. 2 Vols. I. General Aesthetics., II. Psychology. III. Sociology. IV. History of Art. V. The Science of Art. VI. Contemporary Art. [REVIEW]Felix Alcan, Paul Claudel & Victor Basch - 1939 - Philosophical Review 48 (2):225-226.
  46. Science, Technology, Man.U. Aleksieva, Institut Po Filosofiia Naukite) & World Congress of Philosophy - 1973 - Publishing House of the Bulgarian Academy of Science.
  47. Why Cultural Sociology Is Not ‘Idealist’.J. C. Alexander - 2005 - Theory, Culture and Society 22 (6):19-29.
    I make use of this reply to McLennan to offer an overall perspective on the development of my work, normatively, empirically and theoretically, and in its earlier neofunctionalist and later cultural-sociological phase. I argue that, despite periodic suggestions that my cultural sociology seeks to push sociology towards an absolute subjectivity, the social-epistemological framework of ‘multidimensionality’ around which I organized my first work, Theoretical Logic in Sociology, still holds. Cultural sociology introduces a method and theory for understanding a dimension of social (...)
  48. Fact-Signs and Cultural Sociology: How Meaning-Making Liberates the Social Imagination.Jeffrey C. Alexander - 2011 - Thesis Eleven 104 (1):87-93.
  49. Fin de Siáecle Social Theory Relativism, Reduction, and the Problem of Reason.Jeffrey C. Alexander - 1995
  50. Self, Social Structure, and Beliefs Explorations in Sociology.Jeffrey C. Alexander, Gary T. Marx & Christine L. Williams - 2004
1 — 50 / 2571