The Implications of Heterogeneity for the Philosophy, History, Sociology, and Science of Biological Determinism

遗传学研究和社会科学中的定量分析可以通过关注观察到的特征背后的因素的可能异质性来改变。科学社会学认为，思想不能仅仅通过正确来实现其变革潜力;相反，如果要克服来自主流的不可避免的阻力，就需要改变该领域的社会结构。此外，在许多研究人员开始转变之前，必须开辟替代研究方案;批评不足以抛弃主导范式。科学与社会研究（S S）在这种变化中可以发挥什么作用？探索性研究（SGER）的建议确定了一些角度，通过这些角度，PI和其他S S学者可能会在研究和政策中关注异质性的影响。适度的支持将允许PI追求两条轨道，通过这两条轨道，新的想法可以“孕育”足够长的时间，以获得更广泛的观众的关注，如果不是接受的话。第一个轨道将调查四个问题在S S扩展PI的遗传性和异质性的最近的工作，它会在早期，工作进展阶段，这些调查适当的观众和研讨会的审查，以刺激专家深入研究这些问题，并动员合作和协会，以支持彼此在这种新兴的研究。第二个轨道将通过为期一周的密集培训和讨论访问，探索一些科学方法，这些方法可能有助于制定经经验验证的发展途径模型，这些模型的组成部分是异质的，在任何一个时间和几代人之间都是不同的。S S调查和参与科学家的结合，旨在促进遗传性话语的积极批评，并允许PI确定PI的兴趣和技能，不仅在S S，而且在生命科学的定量分析的不寻常的组合的最杠杆的地方和方向。PI预计将在SGER支持的工作的基础上提交一项重大研究提案。这项工作的智力价值在于发展的想法，已被忽视或不太赞赏的科学和S S研究的“基因和环境”，尽管长期和政治上充满了历史的科学和政策辩论的遗传性智商测试成绩和遗传解释之间的差异，平均分数的种族群体。更广泛的影响将是移动流行的讨论超越了有问题的想法基因和环境对人类特征的相对贡献，揭示了持续的兴趣在解释种族基础上定义的群体的平均值之间的差异，并刺激科学和S S研究的方式，以适应异质性的发展途径。

Quantitative analysis in the study of heredity and in social sciences more generally could be transformed through attention to the possible heterogeneity of factors that underlie observed traits. It is understood in the sociology of science that ideas do not realize their transformative potential simply by being correct; rather, changes in the social structure of the field are needed if the inevitable resistance from the mainstream is to be overcome. Moreover, alternative research programs have to be opened up before many researchers begin to shift; critique is not sufficient for a dominant paradigm to be abandoned. What role can studies of science and society (S&S) have in such change? This Small Grant for Exploratory Research (SGER) proposal identifies a number of angles through which the PI and other S&S scholars might bring attention in research and policy to the implications of heterogeneity. Modest support would allow the PI to pursue two tracks through which novel ideas can "gestate" long enough to command attention, if not acceptance, by a wider audience. The first track would investigate four issues in S&S that extend the PI's recent work on heritability and heterogeneity, and it would subject these investigations at an early, work-in-progress stage to the scrutiny of appropriate audiences and workshops with a view to stimulating specialists to delve deeper into these issues, and mobilizing collaborations and associations to support one other in such emergent research. The second track would explore, through intensive week-long training and discussion visits, a number of scientific approaches that may contribute to developing empirically validated models of developmental pathways whose components are heterogeneous and differ among individuals at any one time and over generations. The combination of S&S investigations and engagement with scientists is designed to promote positive critique of heritability discourse, and to allow the PI to identify the place and direction of most leverage for the PI's unusual combination of interests and skills, which lie not only in S&S but also in quantitative analyses in the life sciences. The PI anticipates submission of a major research proposal on the basis of the SGER-supported work. The intellectual merit of the work lies in the development of ideas that have been overlooked or not well appreciated in the science and S&S studies of "genes and environment," despite the long and politically charged history of scientific and policy debates about the heritability of IQ test scores and genetic explanations of the differences between the mean scores for racial groups. The broader impact will be to move popular discussion beyond problematic ideas about the relative contribution of genes and environment to human traits, shed critical light on the persistent interest in explaining differences among the averages for groups defined on racial grounds, and stimulate scientific and S&S research on developmental pathways in ways that accommodate heterogeneity.