Doctoral Dissertation Research: Taking Measure of Conversion Therapy Outcomes

这篇论文研究由美国国家科学基金会的科学、技术和社会项目支持，将研究在关于转化疗法的辩论中，科学证据和可信度是如何被解释的。本项目采用创新的研究技术和解释方法，在关于修复疗法的争论中确定“证据等级”，形成这些等级的因素，以及对诊断技术和主观性的影响。本研究将采用采访科学家和其他关键角色在这场辩论的治疗效果在美国从20世纪50年代到现在。其他数据将来自科学会议的观察和关于这个问题的科学文献的内容分析。为了更清楚地理解偶发事件是如何形成证据层次的，本研究将医学化的“病理时代”（1950-1973）与去医学化后的“正常时代”（1973-至今）进行了比较。利用科学技术研究（STS）、社会运动社会学和性研究方面的跨学科文献，该项目将通过仔细检查各种影响证据可信度的作用，使这些研究实践历史化。本研究将采用共同建构的分析方法，展示诊断技术与主体性如何在研究过程中相互塑造。最值得注意的是，这项工作将确定和解释“真相”技术的部署。通过这一历史比较，研究将展示职业斗争、政治和宗教激进主义如何影响相对于自我报告的真相技术的可信度。本论文研究通过研究一场通常被编码为纯粹意识形态的辩论，但与科学和相应技术发展中的辩论有重要联系，从而为STS文献做出了重要贡献。

This dissertation research, supported by the Science, Technology & Society program at NSF, will examine how scientific evidence and credibility have been interpreted in the debate over conversion therapies. This project uses innovative research techniques and interpretive approaches to identify "hierarchies of evidence" within debates over reparative therapies, the factors shaping these hierarchies, and the consequences for diagnostic technologies and subjectivities. This research will employ interviews with scientists and other key actors in this debate over treatment efficacy in the United States from the 1950s to the present. Additional data will come from observation at scientific conferences and content analyses of scientific literature on this issue. To more clearly understand how contingencies have shaped evidence hierarchies, the work employs a comparison between a "pathology era" (1950-1973) of medicalization and a "normal era" (1973-present) following de-medicalization. Drawing on interdisciplinary literature in science and technology studies (STS), the sociology of social movements, and sexuality studies, the project will historicize these research practices by carefully examining the role of various influences on the credibility of evidence. Using a co-construction analytical approach, the research will show how diagnostic technologies and subjectivities have been mutually shaped in the process of research. Most notably, the work will identify and interpret the deployment of "truthing" technologies. Through this historical comparison, the research will show how professional struggles and political and religious activism have affected the credibility of truthing techniques relative to self-reports. This dissertation research stands to make important contributions to STS literature by examining a debate that is often coded as purely ideological, but that has significant connections to debates within science and corresponding technical developments.