This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Prior, L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Talking About the Gene for Cancer: A Study of Lay and Professional Knowledge of Cancer Genetics

Queen's University Belfast, l.prior{at}qub.ac.uk

This article is concerned with the ways in which people who work in and use a cancer genetics clinic in the UK talk about the `gene for cancer'. By conceptualizing such a gene as a boundary object, and using empirical data derived from clinic consultations, observations in a genetics laboratory and interviews with patients, the author seeks to illustrate how the various parties involved adopt different discursive strategies to appropriate, describe and understand what is apparently the `same' thing.The consequent focus on the ways in which the rhetorical and syntactical features of lay and professional talk interlink and diverge illustrates not merely how our contemporary knowledge of genes and genetics is structured, but also how different publics position themselves with respect to the biochemistry of life.

Key Words: boundary objects • cancer • clinical genetics • lay and professional knowledge • public understanding of science • scientific rhetoric

References

• American Society of Clinical Oncology (1998 ) Cancer Genetics and Cancer Predisposition Testing. Alexandria, VA: ASCO.
• Bazerman, C. (1988) Shaping Written Knowledge. The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Black, M. (1962) Models and Metaphors. Structure in Language and Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• Bourret, P. (2005) `BRCA Patients and Clinical Collectives', Social Studies of Science 35(1): 41—68.[Abstract]
• Bowker, G.C. and S.L. Star (1999) Sorting Things Out. Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Condit, C. (1999a) The Meanings of the Gene. Public debates about human heredity. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Condit, C. (1999b) `How the Public Understands Genetics: Non-Deterministic and Non-Discriminatory Interpretations of the Blueprint Metaphor', Public Understanding of Science 8: 169—80.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Descola, P. (1996) `Constructing Natures: Symbolic Ecology and Social Practice', in P. Descola and G. Palsson (eds) Nature and Society. Anthropological perspectives, pp. 82—102. London: Routledge.
• Durant, J., A. Hansen and M. Bauer (1996) `Public Understandings of the New Genetics', in T. Marteau and M. Richards (eds) The Troubled Helix. Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, pp. 235—48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Durkheim, E. and M. Mauss (1903/1963) Primitive Classification, transl. by R. Needham. London: Cohen & West.
• Fujimura, J. (1996) Crafting Science: A Sociohistory of the Quest for the Genetics of Cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Galison, P. (1997) Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Gibbon, S. (2002) `Re-examining Geneticization. Family Trees in Breast Cancer Genetics', Science as Culture 11(4): 429—57.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Gilbert, G.N. and M. Mulkay (1984) Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists' Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gross, A.G. (1996) The Rhetoric of Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Hedgecoe, A. (1998) `Geneticization, Medicalisation and Polemics', Medicine, Healthcare and Philosophy 1: 235—43.
• Heidegger, M. (1959) An Introduction to Metaphysics, transl. by R. Manheim. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Hesse, M.B. (1966) Models and Analogies in Science. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
• Kay, L.E. (2000) Who Wrote the Book of Life? A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
• Keller, E.F. (1995) Refiguring Life: Metaphors of Twentieth Century Biology. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
• Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (2003) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
• Latour, B. and S. Woolgar (1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. London: Sage.
• Lynch, M. (1985) Art and Artifact in Laboratory Science. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Lynch, M. and S. Woolgar (eds) (1990) Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Myers, G. (1990) Writing Biology: Texts in the Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Nelkin, D. (2001) `Molecular Metaphors: The Gene in Popular Discourse ', Nature Reviews 2: 555—9.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Nerlich, B. and I. Hellsten (2004) `Genomics: Shifts in Metaphorical Landscape Between 2000 and 2003', New Genetics and Society 23(3): 255—68.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Prior, L. (2001) `Rationing Through Risk Assessment in Clinical Genetics', Sociology of Health and Illness 23(5): 570—93.[CrossRef]
• Prior, L. (2003) `Belief, Knowledge and Expertise: The Emergence of the Lay Expert in Medical Sociology', Sociology of Health and Illness 24(2): 41—57.
• Prior, L., F. Wood, J. Gray, R. Pill and D. Hughes (2002) `Making Risk Visible: The Role of Images in the Assessment of Cancer Genetic Risk', Health, Risk and Society 4(3): 242—58.
• Proctor, R. (1995) Cancer Wars: How Politics Shapes What We Know and Don't Know About Cancer. New York, NY: Basic Books.
• Rabinow, P. (1996) Essays on the Anthropology of Reason. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Richards, M. (1996) `Families, Kinship and Genetics', in T. Marteau and M. Richards (eds) The Troubled Helix: Social and Psychological Implications of the New Human Genetics, pp. 249—73. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Ricœur, P. (1977) The Rule of Metaphor. London: Routledge.
• Scott, S., L. Prior, F. Wood and J. Gray ( 2005) `Repositioning the Patient: The Implications of Being "At Risk"', Social Science and Medicine 60: 1869—79.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
• Star, S.L. and J.R. Griesemer (1989) `Institutional Ecology, "Translations" and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 1907—39', Social Studies of Science 19: 387—420.[Abstract]
• Wood, F., L. Prior and J. Gray (2003) `Translations of Risk: Decision Making in a Cancer Genetics Service', Health, Risk and Society 5(2): 186—98.
• Woolgar, S. (1988) Science: The Very Idea. London: Tavistock.

Sociology, Vol. 41, No. 6, 985-1001 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0038038507082311


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Prior, L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?