Scientific Reviews as legitimizing ressource for emerging research fields. The role of scientific reviews as strategic medium in the legitimation process between science and society. The case of Synthetic Biology.

在关于媒体、科学和社会之间相互依存关系的辩论中，记者经常被指责对将科学知识转化为社会舞台的偏见负责。相比之下，科学家被认为或多或少是无私的(Merton 1985)。在这种情况下，被忽视的是，科学家越来越依赖新闻报道和公众意识来证明他们的研究的相关性(Weingart&Pansegrau 1998；Gilbert&Mulkay 1985)。因此，向科学之外的受众介绍科学成果和方案变得更加重要(Weingart 2001)。生命科学的新兴研究领域特别需要合法化，这就需要与科学和非科学行为者制定特殊的交流策略(Jasanoff，2005)。这种合法化的需要如何影响出版实践，特别是对科学体裁形式的选择？这一建议的假设是，体裁科学评论文章提供了特殊的选择，以解决媒体或其他社会行为者可以采取的社会期望，特别是在新兴研究领域的形成阶段。因此，我们建议在建立这一领域的背景下研究体裁科学评论的作用。体裁科学评论应在科学家、科学期刊编辑和科学官员之间的互动中进行分析。在这些背景下，科学审查的作用会发生变化吗？这些出版物涉及哪些非科学目标？它们如何指代社会期望？该提案建立在基于查尔斯·巴泽曼对科学格式的体裁分析(Bazerman，1988)的研究基础上，并将其扩展到针对非科学受众。为此，科学和技术方面的期望的概念将适用于本提案的主题(Borup等人。2006)。该研究项目旨在了解处于科学界和特定受众之间的科学行为者的战略。将特别重视将评论文章放在其中的编辑背景。此外，还将分析非科学行为者使用科学评论文章的情况。这应通过将科学计量学调查与文件分析和专家访谈相结合来实现。

In the debate on interdependencies between media, science and society, journalists are often blamed to be responsible for biases in the transformation of scientific knowledge into societal arenas. In contrast, scientists are presumed to be more or less disinterested (Merton 1985). What is overlooked in that case, is that scientists are more and more dependent on press coverage and public awareness in order to justify the relevance of their research (Weingart & Pansegrau 1998; Gilbert & Mulkay 1985). Therefore, it becomes more important to address scientific results and programs to extrascientific audiences (Weingart 2001). Emerging research fields in the life sciences have a particular need for legitimization which requires particular communicative strategies to scientific and non-scientific actors (Jasanoff 2005). How does this need for legitimization affect publication practices, particularly for the choice of scientific genre forms? The assumption of this proposal is that the genre scientific review article offers particular choices to address societal expectations that can be taken up by the media or other societal actors that are used especially in the formation phase of an emerging research fields. Therefore we propose to study the role of the genre scientific review in the context of the establishment of such a field. The Genre scientific review shall be analyzed in the interplay between scientists, editors of scientific journals and science officials. Does the role of the scientific review change in these contexts? Which non-scientific goals are addressed in these publications? How do they refer to societal expectations? The proposal builds upon research based on Charles Bazermans Genre Analyses of scientific formats (Bazerman 1988) and extends these to address non- scientific audiences. For this reason, the concept of Expectations in Science and Technology will be applied on the subject of this proposal (Borup et al. 2006). The research project aims to understand the strategies of scientific actors that are situated in the intersection between scientific community and specific audiences. Particular emphasis will be given to the editioral context in which the placement of review articles is embedded. Furthermore, the use of scientific review articles by non-scientific actors will be analyzed. This shall be achieved by coupling scientometric investigations with document analysis and expert interviews.