Dissertation Support in Ethics & Values Studies: Examining the Consequences of the Priority Dispute Over the Discovery of the AIDS Virus

科学、技术和社会研究的一个中心焦点是确定科学知识发展的机制。罗莎·哈里托斯的论文研究考察了科学中的发现概念，以及科学界与其他人一起制定、辩论和解决关于发现的冲突的过程。发现是一个动态的过程，由经验和社会两部分组成。本项目以发现艾滋病病毒的优先权之争为例，试图从科学界的价值结构角度来解释这一之争。这项研究将调查四个核心问题：(1)随着时间的推移，争端的起源和发展；(2)参与发现的科学家如何定义这一发现；(3)科学家所信奉的价值观和规范，以及他们的信念如何影响他们在争端中的行为；(4)科学与其社会背景之间的相互联系--确定争端的后果。将使用三个数据来源：(1)对参与发现的科学家进行重点采访；(2)对负责病毒命名和分类的逆转录病毒小组委员会13名成员进行重点采访；(3)对科学文献中引用的关于这一发现的说法进行详细的内容分析。该项目将为当代涉及国际科学的重大公众争议提供重要的第一手和第二手资料，并应有助于理解关于科学发现的优先权争议是如何产生和解决的。这项研究正在由一位著名的科学社会学家指导；研究生已经做好了承担这项研究的充分准备；机构支持充足；预期的结果--一篇论文--即将到来。所要求的支持非常有限，将允许进行所需的面谈。这个奖项是极力推荐的。

A central focus in science, technology and society studies is the identification of mechanisms by which scientific knowledge evolves. The dissertation research of Rosa Haritos examines the concept of discovery in science and the process by which the scientific community, along with others, formulates, debates and resolves conflict about discovery. Discovery is a dynamic process comprised of both empirical and social components. Using the priority dispute over the discovery of the AIDS virus as a case study, this project seeks to explain the dispute in terms of the value structure of the scientific community. The study will investigate four central problems: (1) the genesis and development of the dispute as it evolved over time; (2) how the discovery was defined by the scientists involved in the discovery; (3) the values and norms espoused by scientists and how their beliefs influenced their behavior in the dispute; (4) the inter-connection between science and its social context--identification of the consequences of the dispute. Three sources of data will be used: (1) focused interviews with the scientists involved in the discovery; (2) focused interviews with the 13 member Retroviral Subcommittee, responsible for the nomenclature and classification of the virus; (3) a detailed content analysis of what was said about the discovery when it was cited in the scientific literature. This project will provide important primary and secondary source material about a major contemporary public controversy involving international science, and should contribute to understanding how priority disputes about scientific discovery arise and are resolved. The research is being supervised by an eminent sociologist of science; the graduate student is very well prepared to undertake it; institutional support is adequate; and the expected result--a dissertation--will be forthcoming. The requested support is very modest and will allow the required interviews to occur. The award is highly recommended.