File(s) not publicly available
‘The realm of hard evidence’: novelty, persuasion and collaboration in botanical cladistics
In 1998 a new classification of flowering plants generated headlines in the non-specialist press in Britain. By interviewing those involved with, or critical of, the new classification, this essay examines the participants¿ motives and strategies for creating and maintaining a research group. It argues that the classification was produced by an informal alliance whose members collaborated despite their disagreements. This collaboration was possible because standardised methods and common theoretical assumptions served as ¿boundary objects¿. The group also created a novel form of collective publication that helped to unite them. Both the collaboration and the publishing strategy were partly motivated by the need to give taxonomy a degree of ¿big science¿ credibility that it had previously lacked: creating an international team allowed more comprehensive results; and collective publication served to emphasise both the novelty of the work and its claims to objectivity. Creating a group identity also served to exclude practitioners of alternative forms of taxonomy. Finally, the need to obtain funding for continuing work both created the need to collaborate and influenced the way the classification was presented to the public.
History
Publication status
- Published
Journal
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical SciencesISSN
1369-8486Publisher
ElsevierExternal DOI
Issue
2Volume
32Page range
343-360Pages
18.0Department affiliated with
- History Publications
Full text available
- No
Peer reviewed?
- Yes
Legacy Posted Date
2012-02-06Usage metrics
Categories
No categories selectedKeywords
Licence
Exports
RefWorks
BibTeX
Ref. manager
Endnote
DataCite
NLM
DC