Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Lewis, Jamie Thornton
Languages: English
Types: Doctoral thesis
Subjects: H1
Science is divided and compartmentalised into distinct areas of research. As science develops new research areas emerge and nurture new technologies, new methodological approaches, new disciplines and new research communities. These demarcations are socially constructed spaces that impose a sense of order on science by authenticating the new forms of knowledge that surface. Simply stated, the specific research areas and the social relations contained within them, enable science to progress in a proficient, communal, and sometimes cumulative manner. In this sense the constructed boundaries can be viewed as a set of ordering devices. The mapping of the Human Genome was a significant technical event that reordered biological activity by creating a number of these new socially constructed spaces. This celebrated scientific achievement helped yield a number of emerging 'omic' disciplines, numerous innovative high-throughput technologies, and a myriad of embryonic scientific communities, each with its own distinct identity. In this thesis the Human Genome Project is viewed as the genomic stage of the omic revolution or stage one. The period directly after the sequencing has been coined the post-genomic era and this is described in the thesis as stage two of the social reorganisation of biology. Underpinning the whole thesis is the understanding that omic science is driven by a systems biology (SB) approach to twenty-first century biology. The realisation of this will constitute stage three. Computational biologists are also using a similar model of scientific practice in order to map, trace and direct future scientific practice. However in using this developmental model, the organisation of scientific practice may turn messy when boundaries need to be permeated, re-aligned and re-ordered in the movement from post-genomic science to systems biology science. Consequently the specific aim of this research is to trace how two of these maturing research areas, 'proteomics' and 'bioinformatics', are emerging and stabilising within stage two of the omic model, and to explore some of the social issues that are being reordered within their infrastructure. Drawing upon thirty-one interviews the research provides valuable insight into the social construction of post-genomic knowledge and adds to the growing literature in the field of science and technology studies (STS) by revealing how socially constructed knowledges are translated and transferred within and between newly created scientific communities. This is achieved through an examination of scientific identity, interdisciplinary expertise and community-based standardisation.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Gould, S.J. 1991. Bullyfo r Brontosaurus. New York: W.W.Norton and Company.
    • Granovetter, M.S. 1973. 'The Strength of Weak Ties'. American Journal o f Sociology. 78(6): p p l360-1380.
    • Granovetter, M.S. 1983. 'The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited'. Sociological Theory. 1: pp201-233.
    • Graves, R. 1955. The Greek Myths. London: Penguin.
    • Griffiths, R.T. 1949. 'The Minimotion Typewriter Keyboard'. Journal o f Franklin Institute. 248: pp399-436.
    • Gross, M. 1998. 'Protein Folding: Think Globally, (Inter)act Locally'. Current Biology. 8(9): R308-9.
    • Gunnarsdottir, K. 2005. 'Scientific Journal Publications: On the Role o f Electronic Preprint Exchange in the Distribution of Scientific Literature'. Social Studies o f Science. 35(4): pp549-580.
    • Gupta, P. and Guglani, L. 2001. 'Proteomics: Challenge for the New Millennium'. Indian Pediatrics. 38: pp875-883.
    • Hacking, I. 1992. 'The Self-Vindication o f the Laboratory Sciences'. In Pickering, A. ed. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. pp29-64.
    • Hammersley, M. 2003. 'Analytics are No Substitute for Methodology'. Sociology.
    • 37(2): pp339-351.
    • Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P.A. 1995. Ethnography: Principles in Practice.
    • 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
    • Hanash, S. 2004. 'HUPO Initiatives Relevant to Clinical Proteomics'. Molecular and Cellular Proteomics. 3(4): pp298-301.
    • Hanseth, O., Monteiro, E., Hatling, M. 1996. 'Developing Information Infrastructure: The Tension Between Standardization and Flexibility'. Science, Technology and Human Values. 21(4): pp407-426.
    • Harwood, R. 2002. Biochemistry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Hedgecoe, A. 2001. 'Schizophrenia and the Narrative o f Enlightened Geneticization'. Social Studies o f Science. 31(6): pp.875-911.
    • Human Genome Organisation. 2005. Home Web Page. Available at: [Accessed 3 December 2005].
    • Human Proteome Organisation. 2006. Home Web Page. Available at: [Accessed 8 November 2006].
    • Ideker, T., Galitski, T. and Hood, L. 2001. 'A New Approach to Decoding Life: Systems Biology'. Annual Review o f Genomics and Human Genetics. 2: pp343- 372.
    • Kadushin, C. 1966. 'The Friends and Supporters of Psychotherapy: On Social Circle in Urban L ife'. American Sociological Review. 31: pp786-802.
    • Kadushin, C. 1968. 'Power, Influence and Social Circles: A New Methodology for Studying Opinion M akers'. American Sociological Review. 33: 685-699.
    • Kaiser, J. 2002. 'Public-Private Group Maps out Initiatives'. Science. 296(5569): pp827-828.
    • Kay, L.E. 2000. Who Wrote the Book o f Life? A History o f the Genetic Code.
    • Keating, P., Limoges, C. and Cambrosio, A. 1999. 'The Automated Laboratory: the Generation and Replication o f Work in Molecular Genetics'. In Mendelsohn, E. and Fortun, M. eds. The Practice o f Human Genetics, Sociology o f Sciences Yearbook 19. Dordrecht: Kluwer. p p l25-142.
    • Kellenberger, E. 2004. 'The Evolution o f Molecular Biology'. EMBO Reports.
    • 5(6): pp546-549.
    • Keller, E.F. 2000. The Century o f the Gene. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Kersey, P., Bower, L., Morris, L., Home, A., Petryszak, R., Kanz, C., Kanapin, A., Das, U., Michoud, K., Phan, I., Gattiker, A., Kulikova, T., Faruque, N., Duggan, K., Mclaren, P., Reimholz, B., Duret, L., Penel, S., Reuter, I. and Apweiler, R. 2005. 'Integr8 and Genome Reviews: Integrated Views o f Complete Genomes and Proteomes'. Nucleic Acids. 33: pp297-302.
    • Kevles, D.J. and Hood, L. 1992. eds. The Code o f Codes: Scientific and Social issues in The Human Genome Project. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Klose, J. and Spielmann, H. 1975. 'Gel Isoelectric Focusing o f Mouse Lactate Dehydydrogenase: Heterogeneity o f the Isoenzymes A4 and X 4' Biochemical Genetics. 9-10: pp707-720.
    • Knight, K. 1997. 'Automating Knowledge Acquisition For Machine Translation - Natural Language Processing'. A IM agazine. 18(4): pp81-96.
    • Knorr-Cetina, K.D. 1981. The Manufacture o f Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature o f Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
    • Knorr-Cetina, K.D. 1983. 'The Ethnographic Study o f Scientific Work: Towards a Constructivist Interpretation o f Science'. In Knorr-Cetina, K.D. and Mulkay, M. Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study o f Science. London: Sage, ppl 15-140.
    • Nature Editorial. 1999. 'The Promise o f Proteomics'. Nature. 402(6763): pp703.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article