Graphism thesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

In sociology of science, the graphism thesis is a proposition of Bruno Latour that graphs are important in science.

Research has shown that one can distinguish between hard science and soft science disciplines based on the level of graph use, so it can be argued that there is a correlation between scientificity and visuality.[1][2] Furthermore, natural sciences publications appear to make heavier use of graphs than mathematical and social sciences.[3]

It has been claimed that an example of a discipline that uses graphs heavily but is not at all scientific is technical analysis.[4]

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  1. ^ Darin J. Arsenault; Laurence D. Smith; Edith A. Beauchamp (03/01/2006). "Visual Inscriptions in the Scientific Hierarchy" (PDF). Science Communication 27 (3): 376. doi:10.1177/1075547005285030. http://scx.sagepub.com/content/27/3/376.full.pdf. 
  2. ^ Laurence D. Smith; Lisa A. Best; D. Alan Stubbs; John Johnston; Andrea Bastiani Archibald (02/01/2000). "Scientific Graphs and the Hierarchy of the Sciences:" (PDF). Social Studies of Science 30 (1): 73. doi:10.1177/030631200030001003. http://sss.sagepub.com/content/30/1/73.full.pdf.  at JSTOR
  3. ^ William S. Cleveland (November 1984). "Graphs in Scientific Publications". The American Statistician 38 (4): 261–9. doi:10.2307/2683400. JSTOR 2683400. 
  4. ^ Fool.com: Is Technical Analysis Voodoo? [Fool on the Hill] January 5, 2001

[edit] External links

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Interaction
Toolbox
Print/export