Statistical Theory and Social Interests: A Case-Study

Social Studies of Science

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 1978, Pages 35-83

  Mackenzie, Donald ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DEMOGRAPHY; GENETICS; HISTORY; HISTORY OF MEDICINE; UNITED KINGDOM;

DEMOGRAPHY; GENETICS; GREAT BRITAIN; HISTORY OF MEDICINE, MODERN; STATISTICS;

EID: 0017929487     PISSN: 03063127     EISSN: 14603659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/030631277800800102     Document Type: Article

References (107)

1. For expenditure on cancer research in 1937 see W. H. Donner, ‘Cancer Research’, The International Cancer Research Foundation, Report of Activities During 1938 (Philadelphia: International Cancer Research Foundation, n.d.), 154-57. For the 1951 figure see D. Shaughnessy, ‘The Story of the American Cancer Society’ (unpublished PhD dissertation, Columbia University, 1957), 244. Shaughnessy's figure is in rough accord with the estimate of the American Cancer Society that in 1951 the National Cancer Institute spent 7.176 million dollars and the American Cancer Society 3.884 million dollars on research: American Cancer Society, New Directions in Cancer Research. A Report from American Cancer Society, Inc. (New York: American Cancer Society, Inc., 1967), 159. On the other hand an authoritative estimate made in 1952 suggests that only 6.691 million dollars were spent on American cancer research in 1951: see Stella Leche Deignan and Esther Miller, ‘The Support of Research in Medical and Allied Fields for the Period 1946 through 1951’, ’, Science, Vol. 115 (28 March 1952), 336.
2. There is no standard history of cancer research. However, see Michael B. Shimkin, Contrary to Nature. Being an Illustrated Commentary on Some Persons and Events of Historical Importance in the Development of Knowledge Concerning Cancer (Washington, DC: DHEW, 1977). An introductory discussion of available literature is offered by Shimkin, ‘A History of Cancer Research: A Starter Reading List and Guide’, Cancer Research, Vol. 34 (1974), 1519-20.
3. See also Victor A. Triolo and Ilse L. Riegel, ‘The American Association for Cancer Research 1907-1940: Historical Review’, Cancer Research, Vol. 21 (1961), 137-61
4. Victor A. Triolo and Michael B. Shimkin, ‘The American Cancer Society and Cancer Research: Origins and Organization, 1913-1943’,’, Cancer Research, Vol. 29 (1969), 1615-41.
5. The orientation of experimental cancer research was summarized in a report of a committee established to advise the National Cancer Institute: National Advisory Cancer Council, ‘Fundamental Cancer Research: Report of a Committee Appointed by the Surgeon General’, ’, Public Health Reports, Vol. 53 (1938), 2121-30. (This is reprinted in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 17 [1957], 317-25.) Clinical cancer research was summarized by James Ewing, ‘Some Results of Modern Clinical Cancer Research’, Bulletin of the American Society for the Control of Cancer, Vol. 19 (August 1935), 1-6. The various dimensions of cancer research reviewed by these summaries were explored in a 1937 conference whose proceedings were published as: Henry Baldwin Ward (ed.), Some Fundamental Aspects of the Cancer Problem, Occasional Publications of the AAAS, No. 4 (New York: Science Press, 1937).
6. The activities of the major cancer research laboratories were reviewed in a series of short articles published in the Bulletin of the American Society for the Control of Cancer, Vol. 13 (1931).
7. The growing importance of the integrated cancer clinic during the 1930s was discussed by Frank E. Adair, ‘What the Medical Staff and Hospital Management Can Do for the Cancer Patient’, Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons, Vol. 21, Pt. 2 (1936), 104-08.
8. ‘Cancer: The Great Darkness”, Fortune, Vol. 15 (March 1937), 112.
9. A fine political history of cancer research legislation is given by Stephen Strickland, Politics, Science and Dread Disease (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1972).
10. The statistics and epidemiology of cancer were extensively studied from 1915 by officers of life assurance companies such as F. L. Hoffman and L. I. Dublin, as well as by scientists working for the government at state and federal level. A classic of the inter-war period was F. L. Hoffman, The San Francisco Cancer Survey, 9 Vols. (Newark, NJ: Prudential Press, 1924-34). A detailed study showing the rising mortality from cancer was submitted to the Hearings on the National Cancer Institute: ‘Statement of Thomas L. Parran’, US Congress, Committees on Commerce of the Senate and House, Joint Hearings on Cancer Research, 75th Congress, 1st Session, 8 July 1937, 44-45.
11. ‘US Science Wars against an Unknown Enemy: Cancer”, Life, Vol. 2 (1 March 1937) 11-17; ‘Cancer Army’, Time, Vol. 29 (22 March 1937), 49-56; ‘Cancer: The Great Darkness’, Fortune, Vol. 15 (March 1937), 112-14, 162-79. The contributions of Weiss and Kaempffert were specially noted by the American Society for the Control of Cancer: ‘The Cancer Front - 1937’, Bulletin of the American Society for the Control of Cancer, Vol. 20 (March 1938), 8-9; for evidence of other press activity see ‘Cancer Study cut by Lack of Funds’, New York Times (15 March 1937), 42.
12. ‘Cancer Research”, New York Times (25 March 1937), 24. (The following quotations are from this source.)
13. Francis Carter Wood, ‘Cancer Research Found Seriously Handicapped’, New York Times (4 April 1937), Pt. IV, 8.
14. Kenneth Mees, ‘Research in Industry’, New York Times (14 April 1937), 24
15. Willis Whitney, ‘For Cooperative Research’, New York Times (18 April 1937), Pt. 4, 8
16. Frank Jewett, ‘Individualism in Research’, New York Times (8 May 1937), 18.
17. Samuel Binkley, ‘Industrial Research vs. Cancer Research’, Bulletin of The American Society for the Control of Cancer, Vol. 23 (August 1941), 2. Also see Clarence Cook Little, ‘Cancer Research’, Bulletin of the American Society for the
18. Control of Cancer, Vol. 25 (October 1943), 113: ‘During the past few years there have been at intervals stimulating discussions of the possible value of organizing cancer research as a large business, or perhaps better as the research division of a large business is organized’.’.
19. For brief vignettes of such glamorous wartime medical successes as ‘antimalarials’, ‘blood and blood substitutes’, ‘penicillin’ and ‘aviation medicine’, see James Phinney Baxter, III, Scientists against Time (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1968; first published 1946), 299-393.
20. Extended accounts of penicillin development were given by Robert Coghill, ‘Penicillin, Science's Cinderella’, Chemical and Engineering News, Vol. 22 (1944), 588-93
21. Robert D. Coghill and Roy S. Koch, ‘Penicillin: A Wartime Accomplishment’, Chemical and Engineering News, Vol. 23 (1945), 2310-13; a modern analysis that emphasises the major advances made by the Americans is given by David Wilson, In Search of Penicillin (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1976).
22. Claude Pepper, ‘Isn't Health Important to the Nation?’, New York Times (20 May 1945), Pt. VI. 12, 33-34.
23. New York Times (26 August 1945), Pt. IV, 9. Also see New York Times (16 December 1944), 14 and New York Times (25 August 1945), 10. By 1945 questions of how to organize cancer research were but one part of a wider debate concerned with post-war science as a whole.
24. See Daniel Kevles, ‘The National Science Foundation and the Debate over Postwar Research Policy, 1942-1945: A Political Interpretation of Science - The Endless Frontier’,’, Isis, Vol. 68 (1977), 5-26.
25. Detlev W. Bronk, ‘The Discovery and Interpretation of Biological Phenomena’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 87 (1944), 310; this paper was read in November 1943 at a symposium on the organization, direction, and support of research.
26. See also Wanda K. Farr, ‘Organized and Unorganized Research’, Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 22 (1945), 140-43.
27. A good example is Howard Bartlett, ‘The Development of Industrial Research in the United States’, in US National Resources Committee, Science Committee, Research - A National Resource, Vol. 2: Industrial Research (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1941), 19-77, especially the section entitled ‘Growth of Organized Research’, 34-39; also C. E. Kenneth Mees and John R. Baker, The Path of Science (New York: John Wiley, 1946).
28. See, for example: Standard Oil Development Corporation, The Future of Industrial Research; Papers and Discussion (New York: Standard Oil Development Corporation, 1945)
29. C. C. Furnas (ed.), Research in Industry (New York: Industrial Research Institute, Van Nostrand, 1948)
30. D. H. Killefer, The Genius of Industrial Research (New York: Reinhold Publishing Co., 1948). The most important discussions of the late 1940s were reviewed by R. N. Anthony, ‘Looking Ahead’, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 30 (January-February 1952), 127-36. More comprehensive listings are to be found in: US President's Scientific Advisory Board, Science and Public Policy: A Report to the President, Vol. 3, Administration for Research (Washington, DC: US GPO, 1947), Appendix 4, ‘Administration of Research: A Selective Bibliography’, 253-323
31. George Pollock Bush, Bibliography on Research Administration, Annotated (Washington, DC: University Press of Washington, DC, 1954). The best modern discussion of the development of industrial research is David F. Noble, America by Design: Science, Technology and the Rise of Corporate Capitalism (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1977), 110-66.
32. V. Bush, Science - The Endless Frontier, A Report to the President, (Washington, DC: US GPO, 1945), 86.
33. These figures are taken from Clarence J. West and Callie Hull, Industrial Research Laboratories of the United States, Bulletin of the National Research Council 102 (Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy of Science, 1938). For an extensive discussion of the details of research laboratories in American industry from 1920 to 1938, see George Perazich and Philip M. Field, Industrial Research and Changing Technology, Report M-4 of the National Research Project of the Works Project Administration (Philadelphia: Works Project Administration, 1940).
34. Harvard University Handbook (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1936), xiv.
35. C. K. Mees and J. A. Leermakers, The Organization of Industrial Scientific Research (New York: Van Nostrand, 1950), 44.
36. The importance of the chemotherapy research conducted at the two institutes is indicated by C. G. Zubrod, S. Schepatz, J. Leiter, K. M. Endicott, L. M. Carrese and C. G. Baker, ‘The Chemotherapy Program of the National Cancer Institute: History, Analysis and Plans’,’, Cancer Chemotherapy Reports, Vol. 50 (1966), 348-81. Among other important post-war centres were the National Cancer Institute at Bethesda and the Massachusetts Children's Hospital. Institutes in general have purposely not been discussed, for each requires detailed investigation.
37. See J. Burchenal, ‘Cornelius P. Rhoads’, Cancer, Vol. 12 (1959), facing 1073.
38. Obituary by Alexander Haddow, ‘Cornelius Packard Rhoads’, Lancet, Pt. 2 (5 September 1959), 1299.
39. Southern Research Institute, Presentation and Dedication: Kettering-Meyer Laboratory of the Southern Research Institute, Affiliated with Sloan-Kettering Institute for Cancer Research: 17 December 1953 (Birmingham, Alabama: Southern Research Institute, 1954), 17.
40. See also ‘The Southern Research Institute’, Science, Vol. 101 (9 March 1945), 249-50.
41. For a description of Sloan's orientation, and a personal impression of the Sloan-Kettering under Rhoads, see Bernard Glemser, Man Against Cancer (New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1969), 32-40.
42. See Thomas Alvin Boyd, Professional Amateur: The Biography of Charles Franklin Kettering (New York: Dutton, 1957)
43. Boyd (ed.), Prophet of Progress; Selections from the Speeches of Charles F. Kettering (New York: Dutton, 1961). During the 1920s Kettering had been interested in the work conducted on lead compounds for cancer therapy, reported by W. Blair Bell, ‘Chemotherapy of Malignant Disease with Special Reference to Lead’, Lancet, Pt. 2 (28 July 1928), 164-65.
44. See Thomas Boyd, ‘Interview with Frank Howard’, Kettering Archives- Oral History Project, 11.
45. As reported in the New York Times (8 August 1945), 1.
46. Lives; Memoirs of a Social Inventor [New York: Harper and Row, 1970]) does not discuss the Sloan-Kettering. However, in an article published in 1948, Conant advocated the view of a chemotherapy laboratory as having a role similar to that of an industrial laboratory
47. J. B. Conant, ‘The Interrelation of Pure and Applied Science in the Field of Medicine’, in New York Academy of Medicine (ed.), Perspectives in Medicine (New York: Columbia University Press, 1948), 131-54.
48. Rhoads discussed research in progress at the Memorial Hospital and the Sloan-Kettering on several occasions: e.g. C. P. Rhoads, ‘What is Being Done About Cancer’, Scientific American, Vol. 167 (November 1942), 199-201
49. ‘Sloan-Kettering Report”, in Memorial Hospital for Cancer and Allied Diseases, The Use of Your Money for Cancer Prevention Treatment. Research: Report of the Memorial Hospital: Centre for Cancer and Allied Diseases 1943-46 (New York: Memorial Hospital, 1947), 84-89.
50. Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, Descriptive Pamphlet, 1940-41 (New York: Rockefeller Institute Press, n.d.). For the work carried out at the Rockefeller, see G. W. Corner, A History of the Rockefeller Institute, 1901-53; Origins and Growth (New York: Rockefeller Institute Press, 1964). The National Cancer Institute had forty trained investigators in July 1940
51. Michael B. Shimkin, ‘Research Activities of the National Cancer Institute’, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 5 (October 1944), 77-88.
52. See W. E. Le Gros Clark and P. B. Medawar (eds.), Essays on Growth and Form Presented by D'Arcy Wentworth Thompson (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1945). For Hammett's orientation see ‘Tribute to Frederick Hammett’, Growth, Vol. 14 (1950), n.p. For Reimann, see Hugh Creech, ‘Obituary: Stanley Philip Reimann 1891-1968’, Cancer Research, Vol. 28, Pt. 1 (1968), 808-09.
53. Frederick Hammett, ‘A Method of Planning for Basic Biological Research; with Special Reference to Cancer Research’, ’, Growth, Vol. 5 (1941), 161; see also his ‘Chemistry of Growth in its Bearing on Cancer’, Acta Med. URSS, Vol. 2 (1939), 7-11. For a strong statement of Reimann's views on organized research see Stanley P. Reimann, ‘The Present Status of Cancer Research’, Ohio State Medical Journal, Vol. 43 (1947), 375; ‘This I submit to you is the proper way to do research, not hit or miss, not scouting around in the hope that something will turn up, not fiddling or fooling but organizing for results’.’.
54. See also Reimann, ‘Significant Trends in Cancer Research’, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 135 (1947), 87-88.
55. Frederick Hammett, ‘Organized Cancer Research’, New York Times (28 April 1937), 22.
56. ‘Five Men on Cape Cod”, New York Times (5 December 1937), Pt. IV, 8.
57. Frederick S. Hammett, ‘Cancer Research and Benefit to Patients’, Science, Vol. 103 (14 June 1946), 714.
58. Stanley P. Reimann, ‘The Cancer Problem as it Stands Today’, Transactions and Studies of the College of Physicians, Ser. 4, Vol. 13 (1945), 21.
59. ‘The Lankenau Hospital Research Institute”, in Eighty-first Annual Report of the Lankenau Hospital 1940 (Philadelphia: Lankenau Hospital, 1940), 29: The Institute for Cancer Research and the Lankenau Hospital Research Institute, Second Scientific Report 1949-50 (Philadelphia: The Institute for Cancer Research and Lankenau Hospital Research Institute, 1950), 7.
60. ‘Research Activities at The Institute for Cancer Research and the Lankenau Hospital Research Institute’,”, Philadelphia Medicine, Vol. 43 (22 November 1947), 475.
61. The operation of the ‘subject type of research organization’ and the ‘problem-type organization’ in industry are carefully described by David Bendel Hertz, The Theory and Practice of Industrial Research (New York: McGraw Hill, 1950), 180-91.
62. The Institute for Cancer Research and the Lankenau Hospital Research Institute, Third Scientific Report 1950-1951 (Philadelphia: The Institute for Cancer Research and Lankenau Hospital Research Institute, 1951), 5.
63. A general, if somewhat diffuse, history of chemotherapy is given by J. B. Macgregor, ‘The Search for a Chemical Cure for Cancer’, Medical History, Vol. 10 (1966), 374-85.
64. The state of chemotherapy in 1948 is outlined in detail by D. Karnofsky, ‘Medical Progress; Chemotherapy of Neoplastic Disease’, New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 239 (1948), 226-31, 260-70, 299-305.
65. Developments in the field from the 1940s to the 1970s are described by Joseph H. Burchenal, ‘From Wild Fowl to Stalking Horses: Alchemy in Chemotherapy’, Cancer, Vol. 35 (1975), 1121-35.
66. See Helen M. Dyer, ‘Experimental Treatment of Mammary Tumours in Mice’, in Ray Moulton (ed.), A Symposium on Mammary Tumours in Mice, AAAS Publication 22 (Washington, DC: AAAS, 1945), 171-208.
67. For a technical discussion of the concept of specialty see Richard Whitley, ‘Cognitive and Social Institutionalization of Scientific Specialties and Research Areas’, ’, in Richard Whitley (ed.), Social Processes of Scientific Development (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974), 69-95.
68. On chemotherapy as a medical specialty see John R. Heller, ‘Recent Progress in Cancer Research’, Public Health Reports, Vol. 68 (1953), 312.
69. 2) Therapy of Neoplastic Disease’, Transactions of the Association of American Physicians, Vol. 60 (1947), 110-17.
70. For an exhaustive treatment of the literature on cancer chemotherapy see Helen Dyer, An Index of Tumor Chemotherapy: A Tabulated Compilation of Data from the Literature on Clinical and Experimental Investigations (Washington, DC: Federal Security Agency: Public Health Service, 1949). This book has 329 pages
71. See especially W. H. Woglom, ‘General Review of Cancer Therapy’, in F. R. Moulton (ed.), Approaches to Tumor Chemotherapy (Washington, DC: AAAS, 1947), 1-10
72. Kenneth M. Endicott, ‘The Chemotherapy Program’, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 19 (1957), 275-93.
73. David A. Karnofsky, ‘The Bases for Cancer Chemotherapy’, Stanford Medical Bulletin, Vol. 6 (1948), 257.
74. US President's Scientific Research Board, Science and Public Policy, Vol. 5, The Nation's Medical Research (Washington, DC: US GPO, 1947), 82. Numerous expressions of cynicism about research into chemotherapy of cancer were published in the 1940s. Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry, ‘Cancer and the Need for Facts: I, Frauds and Fables; II, Unestablished Remedies’,’, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 139 (1949), 93-98
75. The Institute for Cancer Research and The Lankenau Hospital Research Institute, First Scientific Report 1948 (Philadelphia: The Institute for Cancer Research and Lankenau Hospital Research Institute, 1949), 12-14.
76. Rhoads, ‘Nutrition and Cancer’, Kansas City Medical Journal, Vol. 19 (January-February 1943), 8-13.
77. A very detailed description of the screening procedure and its organizational structure at the Sloan-Kettering is given by C. Chester Stock, ‘Aspects of Approaches in Experimental Cancer Therapy’, American Journal of Medicine, Vol. 8 (1950), 658-74.
78. C. P. Rhoads, ‘The Sword and the Ploughshare’, Journal of Mt Sinai Hospital, Vol. 13, No. 6 (March-April 1947), 299-309.
79. C. P. Rhoads, ’Nitrogen Mustards in the Treatment of Neoplastic Disease Official Statement’, Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 131 (1946), 656-58.
80. 2. HCl.
81. This form of argument was presented by Rhoads in his ‘Rational Cancer Chemotherapy’, Science, Vol. 119 (15 January 1954), 77-80.
82. S. Farber, L. K. Diamond, R. D. Mercer, R. F. Sylvester and J. A. Wolff, ‘Temporary Remissions in Acute Leukaemia in Children Produced by Folic Acid Antagonist, 4-aminopteroyl-glutamic acid (Aminopterin)’,’, New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 238 (1948), 787-93.
83. The development of folic acid antagonists is described by C. P. Rhoads, ‘Advances in Treatment of Malignant Disease’, Bull. NY Academy of Medicine, Vol. 25, Ser. 2 (1949), 271-84. The way in which sulphonamides prevented the metabolism of folic acid had been described in 1940 by D. P. Woods, ‘The Relation of p-aminobenzoic acid to the Mechanism of Action of Sulphanilamide’, British Journal of Experimental Pathology, Vol. 21 (1940), 74-90
84. by P. Fildes, ‘A Rational Approach to Research in Chemotherapy’, Lancet, Pt. 1 (25 May 1940), 955-57.
85. Rhoads, ‘Newer Aspects of Cancer Research’, American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 49 (1943), 289-98.
86. For an introduction to the literature, see J. B. Thiersch and F. S. Philips, ‘Folic Acid Antagonists in Neoplastic Disease’, American Journal of Medical Science, Vol. 217 (1949), 575-85.
87. George Bosworth Brown, ‘The Biosynthesis of Nucleic Acids as a Basis for an Approach to Chemotherapy’, Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 60 (1954), 185-94.
88. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, Vol. 60 (1954), 183-508.
89. C. Huggins and C. V. Hodges, ‘Studies on Prostatic Cancer: 1. The Effects of Castration, of Estrogen and of Androgen Injections on Serum Phosphatase in Metastatic Carcinoma of the Prostate’,’, Cancer Research, Vol. 1 (1941), 293-97.
90. Rhoads reasoned that since the steroid hormones had a similar chemical structure to carcinogens that had been isolated from tar, a slight error in biosynthesis could make the steroids carcinogenic; see C. P. Rhoads, ‘The Sex Hormones and Cancer Production’, Kansas City Medical Journal, Vol. 18 (November-December 1942), 11-14
91. Rhoads, ‘Clinical Endocrinology and the Cancer Problem,’ Journal of Urology, Vol. 60 (1948), 797-811.
92. K. Dobriner, E. Gordeon, C. P. Rhoads, S. Lieberman and L. F. Fieser, ‘Steroid Hormone Excretion by Normal and Pathological Individuals’, Science, Vol. 95 (22 May 1942), 534-36.
93. Konrad Dobriner, S. Lieberman and C. P. Rhoads, ‘The Excretion in the Urine of Metabolites of Adrenal Cortical Hormone in Health and Disease, Including Neoplastic Growth’,’, Cancer Research, Vol. 7 (1947), 711.
94. O. H. Pearson, C. P. Eliel, Rulon Rawson, Konrad Dobriner and C. P. Rhoads, ‘ACTH and Cortisone-induced Regression of Lymphoid Tumors in Man’, Cancer, Vol. 2 (1949), 943-45.
95. F. R. Heilman and E. C. Kendall, ‘The Influence of 11-hydro-17-hydroxycorticosterone (Compound E) on the Growth of Malignant Tumors in the Mouse’, ’, Endocrinology, Vol. 34 (1944), 416-20.
96. S. P. Reimann, ‘The Organization of a Cancer Research Institute’, American Review of Soviet Medicine, Vol. 4 (1936), 350-51.
97. M. J. Shear, ‘Teamwork in Scientific Research’, Personnel Administration, Vol. 9 (1946), 3-8, 12. Shear pointed out
98. See, for example: Warren O. Hagstrom, ‘Traditional and Modern Forms of Scientific Research’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 9 (1964/1965), 241-63
99. L. Kowarski, ‘Team Work and Individual Work in Research’, in N. Kaplan (ed.), Science and Society (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1965), 247-55
100. Peter H. Rossi, ’Researchers, Scholars and Policy Makers: The Politics of Large-Scale Research’ Daedalus, Vol. 93 (1964), 1142-61
101. Edward Speyer, ’Scientists in the Bureaucratic Age’, Dissent, Vol. 4 (1957), 402-13
102. Gerald M. Swatez, ‘The Social Organization of a University Laboratory’, Minerva, Vol. 8 (1970), 36-58
103. C. H. Townes, ‘Differentiation and Competition between Universities and Other Research Laboratories in the United States’, ’, Daedalus, Vol. 102 (Spring 1973), 153-65
104. Alvin Weinberg, ‘Scientific Teams and Scientific Laboratories’, in Gerald Holton (ed.), The Twentieth Century Sciences; Studies in the Biography of Ideas (New York: W.W. Norton, 1972), 423-42
105. Weinberg, Reflections on Big Science (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1967).
106. see Ron Johnston and David Robbins, ‘The Development of Specialties in Industrialized Science’, The Sociological Review, Vol. 25 (1977), 87-108.
107. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1971).