Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Science history
- Creators: Brian, Jennifer
- Creators: Bozeman, Barry
Description
Writing speculative fiction is a valuable method for exploring the potential societal transformations elicited by advances in science and technology. The aim of this project is to use speculative fiction to explore the potential consequences of precision medicine for individuals’ daily lives. Precision medicine is a vision of the future in which medicine is about predicting, and ultimately preventing disease before symptoms arise. The idea is that identification of all the factors that influence health and contribute to disease development will translate to better and less expensive healthcare and empower individuals to take responsibility for maintaining their own health and wellness. That future, as envisioned by the leaders of the Human Genome Project, the Institute for Systems Biology, and the Obama administration’s Precision Medicine Initiative, is assumed to be a shared future, one that everyone desires and that is self-evidently “better” than the present. The aim of writing speculative fiction about a “precision medicine” future is to challenge that assumption, to make clear the values underpinning that vision of precision medicine, and to leave open the question of what other possible futures could be imagined instead.
ContributorsVenkatraman, Richa (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis advisor) / Maienschein, Jane (Thesis advisor) / Hurlbut, James (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
Over the last few hundred years, best practice in some fields of human action—e.g., the treatment of heart disease, the transportation of persons, goods, and messages, and the destruction of landscapes, structures, and lives—has become dramatically more effective. At the same time, best practice in other fields, e.g., the amelioration of poverty or the teaching of reading, writing, or math, has improved more slowly, if at all. I argue that practice and technology (“know-how”) can only improve rapidly under rather special conditions: that, at any given point in time, some fields are more “progressible” than others.I articulate a conceptual framework describing several characteristics of practice in a field that may facilitate rapid progress. These characteristics, while not fixed, tend to remain fairly stable for long periods of time. I argue that know-how can improve more quickly 1) when offline “vicarious trial” of variations in practice is feasible and useful; 2) when practice is formal and standardized; 3) when practice is substantially performed by artifacts rather than by humans; 4) when outcomes of variations in practice may be rapidly evaluated; 5) when goals of practice are consistently agreed upon; 6) when contexts and objects of practice may be treated as, or have been made, consistent for the purposes of intervention; 7) when components of task systems are not heavily interdependent; and 8) when labor is finely and sharply divided.
I illustrate and elaborate this framework through comparative case studies on efforts to improve practice in three differentially “progressible” fields. I examine rapid improvement in a COVID-19 testing lab, inconsistent improvement in undergraduate algebra instruction, and ambiguous improvement in regional water modeling to support municipal water management. These cases indicate that my theory may inform judgments about the plausibility of rapid advance within a field of practice, absent disruptive change in methods or problem formulation. My theory may also shed light on which varieties of innovative effort may and may not foreseeably contribute to improving practice in a given field—more formal, theoretical, and context-independent work in high-progressibility domains, more tacit, grounded, and localized work in low-progressibility ones.
ContributorsNelson III, John Paul (Author) / Sarewitz, Daniel (Thesis advisor) / Bozeman, Barry (Committee member) / Guston, David (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2023
Description
This is a project about medicine and the history of a condition called premenstrual syndrome (PMS), its “discovery” and conceptual development at both scientific and socio-cultural levels. Since it was first mentioned in medical literature, PMS has been explored empirically as a medical condition and conceptually as non-somatic cultural phenomenon. Many attempts have been made to produce scientific, empirical evidence to bolster the theory of PMS as a biological disease. Some non-medical perspectives argue that invoking biology as the cause of PMS medicalizes a natural function of the female reproductive system and shallowly interrogates what is actually a complex bio-psycho-social phenomenon. This thesis questions both sides of this debate in order to reveal how criteria for PMS were categorized despite disagreement surrounding its etiology.
This thesis illustrates how the concept of PMS developed and was informed by the discovery of hormones and the resulting field of endocrinology that provided a framework for conceptualizing PMS. It displays how the development of the medical diagnostic category of PMS developed in tandem with the emergence of the field of endocrinology and was legitimized and effectively medicalized through this connection. The diagnosis of PMS became established though the diagnostic techniques like questionnaires in spite of persistent disagreement over its definition. The thesis shows how these medical concepts and practices legitimated the category of PMS, and how it has become ubiquitous in contemporary culture.
This thesis illustrates how the concept of PMS developed and was informed by the discovery of hormones and the resulting field of endocrinology that provided a framework for conceptualizing PMS. It displays how the development of the medical diagnostic category of PMS developed in tandem with the emergence of the field of endocrinology and was legitimized and effectively medicalized through this connection. The diagnosis of PMS became established though the diagnostic techniques like questionnaires in spite of persistent disagreement over its definition. The thesis shows how these medical concepts and practices legitimated the category of PMS, and how it has become ubiquitous in contemporary culture.
ContributorsZietal, Bianca (Author) / Hurlbut, James (Thesis advisor) / Robert, Jason (Committee member) / Brian, Jennifer (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2016
Description
The three essays in this dissertation each examine how aspects of contemporary administrative structure within American research universities affect faculty outcomes. Specific aspects of administrative structure tested in this dissertation include the introduction of new administrative roles, administrative intensity (i.e. relative size of university administration), and competing roles between faculty, administrators, and staff. Using quantitative statistical methods these aspects of administrative structure are tested for their effects on academic grant productivity, faculty job stress, and faculty job satisfaction. Administrative datasets and large scale national surveys make up the data for these studies and quantitative statistical methods confirm most of the hypothesized relationships.
In the first essay, findings from statistical modeling using instrumental variables suggest that academic researchers who receive administrative support for grant writing and management obtain fewer grants and have a lower success rate. However, the findings also suggest that the grants these researchers do receive are much larger in terms of dollars. The results indicate that administrative support is particularly beneficial in academic grant situations of high-risk, high-reward. In the second essay, ordered logit models reveal a statistically significant and stronger relationship between staff intensity (i.e., the ratio of faculty to staff workers) and faculty stress than the relationship between executive intensity (i.e., the ratio faculty to executive and managerial workers) and faculty job stress. These findings confirm theory that the work of faculty is more loosely coupled with the work of executives than it is with staff workers. A possible explanation is the increase in administrative work faculty must take on as there are fewer staff workers to take on administrative tasks. And finally, in the third essay results from multi-level modeling confirm that both role clarity and institutional support positively affect both a global measure of faculty job satisfaction and faculty satisfaction with how their work time is allocated. Understanding the effects that administrative structure has on faculty outcomes will aid universities as faculty administrative burdens ebb and flow in reaction to macro trends in higher education, such as unbundling of faculty roles, unbundling of services, neoliberalism, liberal arts decline, and administrative bloat.
In the first essay, findings from statistical modeling using instrumental variables suggest that academic researchers who receive administrative support for grant writing and management obtain fewer grants and have a lower success rate. However, the findings also suggest that the grants these researchers do receive are much larger in terms of dollars. The results indicate that administrative support is particularly beneficial in academic grant situations of high-risk, high-reward. In the second essay, ordered logit models reveal a statistically significant and stronger relationship between staff intensity (i.e., the ratio of faculty to staff workers) and faculty stress than the relationship between executive intensity (i.e., the ratio faculty to executive and managerial workers) and faculty job stress. These findings confirm theory that the work of faculty is more loosely coupled with the work of executives than it is with staff workers. A possible explanation is the increase in administrative work faculty must take on as there are fewer staff workers to take on administrative tasks. And finally, in the third essay results from multi-level modeling confirm that both role clarity and institutional support positively affect both a global measure of faculty job satisfaction and faculty satisfaction with how their work time is allocated. Understanding the effects that administrative structure has on faculty outcomes will aid universities as faculty administrative burdens ebb and flow in reaction to macro trends in higher education, such as unbundling of faculty roles, unbundling of services, neoliberalism, liberal arts decline, and administrative bloat.
ContributorsTaggart, Gabel (Author) / Welch, Eric (Thesis advisor) / Bozeman, Barry (Committee member) / Ott, Molly (Committee member) / Stritch, Justin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
Today in the U.S. the narrative of the “bad drug” has become quite a familiar account. There is an ever-growing collection of pharmaceutical products whose safety and efficacy has been debunked through the scandalous exposure of violations of integrity on the part of researchers, lapses in procedure and judgment on the part of the FDA, and reckless profiteering on the part of big pharma. However, a closer look reveals that the oversights and loopholes depicted in the bad drug narrative are not incidental failures of an otherwise intact, effective system. Rather, bad drugs, like good drugs, are a product of normal operations of the system; the same processes, actors, and influences manifest in both. The aim of this project is to shed light on these processes, actors, and influences at work in drug normalization by interrogating the peculiar case of the drug Lupron. Lupron exhibits all of the controversial features of the “bad drug” narrative but has remained an endorsed and embraced staple of the infertility industry. This contradiction situates Lupron to expose a number of the contingencies on which drug normalization rests more generally. In order to put forth an explanatory model for drug normalization, three such contingencies are described in detail for the case at hand: the nature of drug regulation, the structures and value that underpin the medical categorization of diseases, and the inextricability of post-medicine from the forces of industry. These contingencies provide some explanatory power for understanding not only the retention of Lupron but the ways in which all drugs are produced, validated, and perpetuated in a society.
ContributorsStevenson, Christine, M.S (Author) / Brian, Jennifer (Thesis advisor) / Hurlbut, Benjamin (Thesis advisor) / Maienschein, Jane (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015