000			02095nam a22001577a 4500
999			_c514530 _d514530
008			201112b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aDecoteau, Claire Laurier and Daniel, Meghan. _920986
245			_aScientific hegemony and the field of autism
260			_aAmerican Sociological Review
300			_a85(3), Jun, 2020: p.451-476
520			_aAutism is one of the twenty-first century’s most contested illnesses. Early controversies around vaccine harm have irrevocably structured the field of autism science. Despite incredible investment in genetic research on autism over the past 30 years, scientists have failed to identify a set of “genes for” autism, and genomic causality has become more complex. Yet, orthodox genetic explanations for autism have retained dominance over a vociferous field of heterodox experts pointing to a series of environmental insults (vaccines, heavy metal exposure, overuse of antibiotics, toxic pollution) as the main causes of autism. To make sense of this puzzling trend, we develop a novel theoretical synthesis combining a Bourdieusian field analysis with a Gramscian conception of hegemony, centered around the concept of “subsumptive orthodoxy.” Analyzing multiple years of archival data from the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, we argue that when faced with heterodox challenges, dominant members of the field shore up hegemony by incorporating environmental causal factors into the genome, thus engaging in subsumptive orthodoxy. This move gives rhetorical space to environmental explanations without providing them substantive causal weight, which renders particular environmental causes (like vaccines) impossible. This article traces the strategies dominant members of the field use to retain control over the definition and etiology of autism. We develop the broader implications of the study within autism science and beyond.- Reproduced
650			_aAutism, Scientific field, Qenetics, Vaccines, Bourdieu, Gramsci _919254
773			_aAmerican Sociological Review
906			_aAUTISM IN CHILDREN
942			_cAR