000			02041nam a22001457a 4500
999			_c528931 _d528931
008			250203b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aNavon, Daniel _950508
245			_aReiterated fact-making: Explaining transformation and continuity in scientific facts
260			_aAmerican Sociological Review
300			_a89(5), Oct, 2024: p.849-875
520			_aScientific facts are an essential element of modern life. Yet, despite an abundance of illuminating work in science and technology studies (STS), we lack a rigorous sociological framework for explaining how scientific facts emerge, gain traction, and then change over time. This article fills that gap. Drawing on Fleck ([1935] 1981), Haydu (1998), and a wealth of STS scholarship, I develop a comparative-historical approach called “reiterated fact-making” that analyzes scientific facts according to (1) the prevailing conditions of possibility; (2) the networks of expertise, social mobilization, and power built up around them; and (3) the epistemic and material path dependencies that accrue over the course of their careers. To demonstrate the utility of this framework, I draw on a mixed-methods study and explain the uneven histories of three genetic variants (XYY, Fragile X, and the 22q11.2 microdeletion) that have been used to delineate and diagnose new medical conditions associated with neurodevelopmental differences for the past several decades—taking on very different scientific, clinical, and social meanings as facts in the process. Reiterated fact-making helps us combine comparative-historical sociology and STS to explain how scientific facts can combine deep continuity and radical transformation as they are enrolled in shifting fields of research and practice.- Reproduced https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00031224241271100
650			_aScience and knowledge, Comparative-historical sociology, Human genetics, Social and scientific facts, Patient advocacy. _950509
773			_aAmerican Sociological Review
942			_cAR