Changing the meaning of peer-to-peer? Exploring online comment spaces as sites of negotiated expertise

Journal of Science Communication

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 1-13

  Shanahan, Marie Claire ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955906241     PISSN: None     EISSN: 18242049     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.22323/2.09010201     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. H.M. Collins and R. Evans (2002), The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience, Social Studies of Science 32(2): 235-296.
2. R. Evans and H. Collins (2008), Expertise: From attribute to attribution and back again? in E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch and J. Wajcman (eds.), The handbook of science and technologies studies, Cambridge MA, MIT Press, pp. 609-630.
3. R. Evans and A. Plow (2007), Listening without prejudice?: Re-discovering the value of the disinterested citizen, Social Studies of Science 37(6): 827-853.
4. R. Evans and H. Collins (2008); see 2.
5. H.M. Collins and R. Evans, Rethinking expertise, University of Chicago Press, Chicago U.S.A.
6. R. Evans and H. Collins (2008); see 2.
7. R. Evans and A. Plow (2007), see 3.
8. S. Parry (2009), Stem cell scientists' discursive strategies for cognitive authority, Science as Culture 18(1): 89-114.
9. H.M. Collins and R. Evans (2002), see 1.
10. B. Wynne (2002), Seasick on the third wave? Subverting the hegemony of propositionalism: response to Collins & Evans (2002), Social Studies of Science 33(3): 401-417.
11. PatientsLikeMe Inc. (2005)-(2009), http://www.patientslikeme.com.
12. Galaxy Zoo (2009), http://www.galaxyzoo.org.
13. T.F. Gieryn (1983), Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists, American Sociological Review 48(6): 781-795.
14. T.F. Gieryn (1999), Cultural boundaries of science: credibility on the line, University of Chicago Press, Chicago U.S.A.
15. M. Aitken (2009), Wind power planning controversies and the construction of 'expert' and 'lay' knowledges, Science as Culture, 18(1): 47-64.
16. S. Parry (2009), Stem cell scientists' discursive strategies for cognitive authority, Science as Culture 18(1): 89-114.
17. A. Moore and J. Stilgoe (2009), Experts and anecdotes: the role of 'anecdotal evidence' in public scientific controversies, Science Technology Human Values 34(5): 654-677.
18. H. Arksey (1994), Expert and lay participation in the construction of medical knowledge, Sociology of Health and Illness 16(4): 448-468.
19. L. Monaghan (1999), Challenging medicine? Body building, drugs and risk, Sociology of Health and Illness 21(6): 707-734.
20. J. Popay, G. Williams, C. Thomas and T. Gatrell (1998), Theorising inequalities in health: The place of lay knowledge. Sociology of Health and Illness 20(5): 619-644.
21. M.A.K. Halliday (1997), On the grammar of scientific English, in J.J. Webster (ed.), The language of science, pp. 181-198, London: Continuum.
22. M.A.K. Halliday (1998), Things and relations: regrammaticizing experience as technical knowledge, in J.R. Martin and R. Veel (eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science, London: Routledge.
23. A. Moore and J. Stilgoe (2009); see 17, p. 660.
24. Science (2009), Information for authors, retrieved October 10, available at http://www.sciencemag.org/about/authors/.
25. K. Minol et al. (2007), Portals, blogs and co.: the role of the Internet as a medium of science communication, Biotechnology Journal 2(9): 1129-1140.
26. A. Ashlin and R.J. Ladle (2006), Environmental science adrift in the blogosphere, Science 312(5771): 201.
27. S. Parry (2009); see 8.
28. K. Minol et al. (2007); see 25.
29. A. Ashlin and R.J. Ladle (2006); see 26.
30. K. Minol et al. (2007); see 23, p. 1130.
31. W. Gunn (2009), Online Engagemen5 of Scientists with the literature: anonymity vs. ResearcherID, Retrieved from http://synthesis.williamgunn.org/2009/05/24/online-engagement-of-scientists-with-the-literature-anonymity-vs-researcherid/
32. Coturnix, 2009, Commenting on scientific papers, Retrieved from http://scienceblogs.com/clock/2009/05/commenting_on_scientific_paper.php.
33. Genereg, 2009, May 24, Why people do not comment online articles? Comments posted to http://friendfeed.com/science-2-0/9af350c1/why-people-do-not-comment-online-articles-what.
34. C. Neylon (2009), May 24, Why people do not comment online articles? Comments posted to http://friendfeed.com/science-2-0/9af350c1/why-people-do-not-comment-online-articles-what.
35. Genereg, 2009; see 33.
36. Peanut exposure reduces allergy, February 23 (2009), The Globe and Mail
37. C. Abraham (2009), February 24, The Globe and Mail, p. A1.
38. M. Jimenez (2009), March 24, Attention-deficit disorder linked to obesity, The Globe and Mail, p. L1.
39. M.A.K. Halliday (1997); see 21.
40. M.A.K. Halliday (1998); see 22.
41. M.G.W. Bamberg (1997), Positioning between structure and performance, Journal of Narrative and Live History 7(1-4): 335-342.
42. M.A.K. Halliday (1997); see 21.
43. Z. Fang (2006), The language demands of science reading in middle school, International Journal of Science Education 28: 491-520.
44. M.G.W. Bamberg (1997); see 41.
45. S. Parry (2009); see 8.
46. S. Parry (2009); see 8.
47. N.J. Fox, K.J. Ward and A.J. O'Rourke (2005), The 'expert patient': empowerment or medical dominance? The case of weight loss, pharmaceutical drugs and the Internet, Social Science & Medicine 60:1299-1309.
48. Z. Fang (2006); see 43.
49. M.A.K. Halliday (1998); see 20.