Graphism thesis: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Black Falcon (talk | contribs) m reordered appendices per Wikipedia:Layout |
m →Cite journal with Wikipedia template filling, tweak cites |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In [[sociology of science]], the '''graphism thesis''' is a proposition of [[Bruno Latour]] that [[graphics|graphs]] are important in science. |
In [[sociology of science]], the '''graphism thesis''' is a proposition of [[Bruno Latour]] that [[graphics|graphs]] are important in science. |
||
Research has shown that we can distinguish between [[hard science]] and [[soft science]] disciplines based on the level of [[graphics|graph]] use, so it can be argued that there is a correlation between scientificity and visuality.<ref name="arsenault2006"> |
Research has shown that we can distinguish between [[hard science]] and [[soft science]] disciplines based on the level of [[graphics|graph]] use, so it can be argued that there is a correlation between scientificity and visuality.<ref name="arsenault2006">{{cite journal |author1=Darin J. Arsenault |author2=Laurence D. Smith |author3=Edith A. Beauchamp |date=03/01/2006 |title=Visual Inscriptions in the Scientific Hierarchy |journal=Science Communication |volume=27 |issue=3 |pages=376 |doi=10.1177/1075547005285030 |url=http://scx.sagepub.com/content/27/3/376.full.pdf |format=PDF}}</ref><ref name="smith2000">{{cite journal |author1=Laurence D. Smith |author2=Lisa A. Best |author3=D. Alan Stubbs |author4=John Johnston |author5=Andrea Bastiani Archibald |date=02/01/2000 |title=Scientific Graphs and the Hierarchy of the Sciences: |journal=Social Studies of Science |volume=30 |issue=1 |pages=73 |doi=10.1177/030631200030001003 |url=http://sss.sagepub.com/content/30/1/73.full.pdf |format=PDF}} [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0306-3127(200002)30%3A1%3C73%3ASGATHO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M at JSTOR]</ref> Furthermore, [[natural sciences]] publications appear to make heavier use of graphs than mathematical and [[social sciences]].<ref name="cleveland1984">{{cite journal |author=William S. Cleveland |title=Graphs in Scientific Publications |journal=The American Statistician |volume=38 |issue=4 |pages=261–9 |year=1984 |month=November |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/2683400}}</ref> |
||
Papers on this area have been published by academics of [[University of Maine]]. |
Papers on this area have been published by academics of [[University of Maine]]. |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
==External links== |
==External links== |
||
*{{cite journal |author=Best LA, Smith LD, Stubbs DA |title=Graph use in psychology and other sciences |journal=Behav. Processes |volume=54 |issue=1-3 |pages=155–165 |year=2001 |month=May |pmid=11369467 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0376635701001565}} |
|||
* [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11369467&dopt=Citation Graph use in psychology and other sciences] |
|||
*{{cite journal |author=Roger Krohn |title=Why are graphs so central in science? |journal=Biology and Philosophy |volume=6 |issue=2 |pages=181-203 |year=1991 |doi=10.1007/BF02426837 |url=http://www.springerlink.com/content/n71852g5411ht678/}} |
|||
* [http://www.springerlink.com/content/n71852g5411ht678/ Why are graphs so central in science?] |
|||
*{{cite journal |author=William S. Cleveland |title=Graphs in Scientific Publications |journal=The American Statistician |volume=38 |issue=4 |pages=261–9 |year=1984 |month=November |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/2683400}} |
|||
* [http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003-1305(198411)38%3A4%3C261%3AGISP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1 Graphs in scientific publications] |
|||
[[Category:Sociology of science]] |
[[Category:Sociology of science]] |
||
Revision as of 12:44, 18 October 2010
In sociology of science, the graphism thesis is a proposition of Bruno Latour that graphs are important in science.
Research has shown that we 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]
Papers on this area have been published by academics of University of Maine.
It has been claimed that an example of a discipline that uses graphs heavily but is not at all scientific is technical analysis.[4]
See also
References
- ^ 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.
{{cite journal}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) - ^ 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.
{{cite journal}}: Check date values in:|date=(help) at JSTOR - ^ William S. Cleveland (1984). "Graphs in Scientific Publications". The American Statistician. 38 (4): 261–9.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help) - ^ Fool.com: Is Technical Analysis Voodoo? [Fool on the Hill] January 5, 2001
External links
- Best LA, Smith LD, Stubbs DA (2001). "Graph use in psychology and other sciences". Behav. Processes. 54 (1–3): 155–165. PMID 11369467.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Roger Krohn (1991). "Why are graphs so central in science?". Biology and Philosophy. 6 (2): 181–203. doi:10.1007/BF02426837.
- William S. Cleveland (1984). "Graphs in Scientific Publications". The American Statistician. 38 (4): 261–9.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help)