Ambivalence, equivocation and the politics of experimental knowledge: A transdisciplinary neuroscience encounter

Social Studies of Science

Volumn 44, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 701-721

  Fitzgerald, Des ^a,b   Littlefield, Melissa M ^c   Knudsen, Kasper J ^b   Tonks, James ^d,e   Dietz, Martin J ^b  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^d Dame Hannah Rogers Trust   (United Kingdom)

^e UNIVERSITY OF EXETER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

affect; equivocation; experiment; interdisciplinarity; lie detection; neuroscience; transdisciplinarity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; COOPERATION; FORENSIC MEDICINE; INTERDISCIPLINARY EDUCATION; KNOWLEDGE; NEUROSCIENCE; POLITICS; SOCIOLOGY;

ATTITUDE; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES; KNOWLEDGE; LIE DETECTION; NEUROSCIENCES; POLITICS; SOCIOLOGY;

EID: 84906494992     PISSN: 03063127     EISSN: 14603659     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0306312714531473     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Aboelela SW,Larson E,Bakken S,Carrasquillo O,Formicola A,Glied SA, et al.Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature.Health Services Research. 2007;42 (1 Pt 1): 329-346
2. Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) (2012) Science in culture. Available at: http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/Funding-Opportunities/Research-funding/Themes/Science-in-Culture/Pages/Science-in-Culture.aspx (accessed 7 March 2014).
3. Barry A,Born G,Weszkalnys G.Logics of interdisciplinarity.Economy and Society. 2008;37 (1): 20-49
4. Benneworth P,Jongbloed BW.Who matters to universities? A stakeholder perspective on humanities, arts and social sciences valorisation.Higher Education. 2010;59 (5): 567-588
5. Browne J,Barber M,Coyle D,Eastwood D,King J,Naik R, et alSecuring a Sustainable Future for Higher Education: An Independent Review of Higher Education Funding & Student Finance. London: The Stationary Office; 2010:
6. Bruce A,Lyall C,Tait J,Williams R.Interdisciplinary integration in Europe: The case of the fifth framework programme.Futures. 2004;36 (4): 457-470
7. Bunn GCThe Truth Machine: A Social History of the Lie Detector. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press; 2012:
8. Calvert JCollaboration in the New Life Sciences. Parker JNVermeulen NPenders B, ed. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2010:201-218.
9. Chiao JY.Cultural neuroscience: A once and future discipline.Progress in Brain Research. 2009;178:287-304
10. Choudhury S,Nagel SK,Slaby J.Critical neuroscience: Linking neuroscience and society through critical practice.BioSocieties. 2009;4 (1): 61-77
11. Collins HM,Evans R.The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience.Social Studies of Science. 2002;32 (2): 235-296
12. Collins HM,Evans R,Gorman M.Trading zones and interactional expertise.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A. 2007;38 (4): 657-666
13. Cromby J,Newton T,Williams SJ.Neuroscience and subjectivity.Subjectivity. 2011;4 (3): 215-226
14. European Neuroscience and Society Network (ENSN) (2007) About ENSN. Available at: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/sshm/research/ensn/ENSN-About.aspx (accessed 8 April 2013).
15. European Neuroscience and Society Network (ENSN) (2009) Vienna NeuroSchool: Social Neuroscience and Neuroimaging. Available at: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/sshm/research/ensn/neuroschools/Vienna-NeuroSchool-2009/Vienna-Neuroschool.aspx (accessed 8 April 2013).
16. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: Understanding Collaboration between the Social Sciences and the Life Sciences: An ESF SCSS Strategic Workshop Report. Strasbourg: ESF; 2013:
17. Fassin D.Another politics of life is possible.Theory, Culture & Society. 2009;26 (5): 44-60
18. Fitzgerald D,Callard F.Experimental entanglements: Social science and neuroscience beyond interdisciplinarity.Theory, Culture and Society.:
19. The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Frodeman RKlein JTMitcham C, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2010:
20. Galison PThe Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Context and Power. Galison PStump DJ, ed. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1996:118-157.
21. Galison PImage and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press; 1997:
22. Gieryn TF.Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists.American Sociological Review. 1983;48 (6): 781-795
23. Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise: Creating New Kinds of Collaboration. Gorman ME, ed. Boston, MA: The MIT Press; 2010:
24. Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research. Hadorn GHHoffmann-Riem HBiber-Klemm SGrossenbacher-Mansuy WJoye DPohl C, ed. Berlin: Springer; 2008:
25. Haraway DJModest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan©_Meets_OncoMouseTM: Feminism and Technoscience. London: Routledge; 1997:
26. Holmwood J.Sociology’s misfortune: Disciplines, interdisciplinarity and the impact of audit culture.British Journal of Sociology. 2010;61 (4): 639-658
27. Huutoniemi K,Klein JT,Bruun H,Hukkinen J.Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators.Research Policy. 2010;39 (1): 79-88
28. Iacoboni MMirroring People: The Science of Empathy and How We Connect with Others. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 2008:
29. Jasanoff S.Constitutional moments in governing science and technology.Science and Engineering Ethics. 2011;17 (4): 621-638
30. Klein JTThe Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity. Frodeman RKlein JtMitcham C, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012 [2010]:15-30.
31. Knorr Cetina KEpistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press; 1999:
32. Langleben DD,Loughead JW,Bilker W,Ruparel K,Childress AR,Busch SI, et al.Telling truth from lie in individual subjects with fast event-related fMRI.Human Brain Mapping. 2005;26 (4): 262-272
33. Latour BPandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1999:
34. Latour B.An attempt at a ‘compositionist manifesto’.New Literary History. 2010;41:471-490
35. The Encultured Brain: An Introduction to Neuroanthropology. Lende DHDowney G, ed. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2012:
36. Lieberman MD.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience: When opposites attract.Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. 2006;1(1):1-2
37. Littlefield MM.Constructing the organ of deceit: The rhetoric of fMRI and brain fingerprinting in post-9/11 America.Science, Technology & Human Values. 2009;34(3):365-392
38. Littlefield MMThe Lying Brain: Lie Detection in Science and Science Fiction. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press; 2011:
39. Littlefield MM,Fitzgerald D,Knudsen K,Tonks J,Dietz MJ.Contextualizing neuro collaborations: Reflections on a transdisciplinary fMRI lie detection experiment.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2014;8:
40. Littlefield MM,Fitzgerald D,Knudsen K,Tonks J,Dietz M.A telling truth: Veridical statements about others activates insula and medial prefrontal cortex.:
41. Lyall C,Meagher LR.A masterclass in interdisciplinarity: Research into practice in training the next generation of interdisciplinary researchers.Futures. 2012;44 (6): 608-617
42. Maasen SPractising Interdisciplinarity. Weingart PStehr N, ed. Toronto, ON, Canada: University of Toronto Press; 2000:173-193.
43. McGettigan AThe Great University Gamble: Money, Markets and the Future of Higher Education. London: Pluto Press; 2013:
44. Martin ECultural Bodies: Ethnography and Theory. Thomas HAhmed J, ed. Oxford: Blackwell; 2004:190-211.
45. Martin E.The potentiality of ethnography and the limits of affect theory.Current Anthropology. 2013;54 (7): s149-s158
46. Nissani M.Ten cheers for interdisciplinarity: The case for interdisciplinary knowledge and research.Social Science Journal. 1997;34 (2): 201-216
47. Philpott K,Dooley L,O’Reilly C,Lupton G.The entrepreneurial university: Examining the underlying academic tensions.Technovation. 2011;31 (4): 161-170
48. Rabinow P,Bennett GDesigning Human Practices: An Experiment with Synthetic Biology. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press; 2012:
49. The New Brain Sciences: Perils and Prospects. Rees DRose S, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2004:
50. Rheinberger H-J.Consistency from the perspective of an experimental systems approach to the sciences and their epistemic objects.Manuscrito. 2011;34 (1): 307-321
51. Roepstorff A,Frith C.Neuroanthropology or simply anthropology? Going experimental as method, as object of study, and as research aesthetic.Anthropological Theory. 2012;12 (1): 101-111
52. Roepstorff A,Niewöhner J,Beck S.Enculturing brains through patterned practices.Neural Networks. 2010;23 (8–9): 1051-1059
53. Rose N,Abi-Rached JMNeuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2013:
54. Schmidt JC.Towards a philosophy of interdisciplinarity: An attempt to provide a classification and clarification.Poiesis & Praxis. 2008;5 (1): 53-69
55. Singh I.Human development, nature and nurture: Working beyond the divide.BioSocieties. 2012;7 (3): 308-321
56. Star SL,Griesemer JR.Institutional ecology, ‘translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39.Social Studies of Science. 1989;19 (3): 387-420
57. Suchman LInterdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the Social and Natural Sciences. Barry ABorn G, ed. London: Routledge; 2013:141-160.
58. Vidal F.Brainhood, anthropological figure of modernity.History of the Human Sciences. 2009;22 (1): 5-36
59. Wilson EAPsychosomatic: Feminism and the Neurological Body. Durham, NC: Duke University Press; 2004:
60. Wolpe PR,Foster KR,Langleben DD.Emerging neurotechnologies for lie-detection: Promises and perils.American Journal of Bioethics. 2010;10 (10): 40-48
61. WortonM (2013) Big picture from all angles. Times Higher Education. Available at: http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/comment/opinion/big-picture-from-all-angles/2001745.article (accessed 4 April 2013).