Nonstandardization in Science: Discontinuities in Population Classification in Genomic Science

• In Event: 346 - Regular Session. Sociology of Science 1

Abstract

A paradox of the post-genomic era has been the simultaneous genetic critique of the concept of race with the proliferation of genetic research mobilizing racial categories and tracking racial differences. STS scholars have discussed the “categorical alignment” of governmental racial standards with in biological and medical research and the subsequent molecularization of race. An implication is that the scientific standardization of racial categories has served to build the authority of genetics. In this paper we make the opposite argument: geneticists have authority over race through the non-standardization of racial categories. We draw from two data sources. First, we use interview data with prominent geneticists to show their ambivalence about the implementation of particular racial classifications. Second, we use a content analysis of the population labels used in articles in Nature Genetics in 1993, 2001, and 2009 (the years immediately following the Human Genome Diversity Project, the Human Genome Project, and the International HapMap Project (Phase II)). We find that geneticists use no fewer than eight distinctive taxonomic systems (racial, ethnic, national, regional, continental, linguistic, etc.), the diversity of categories employed increases over time, and geneticists often mix several taxonomies in the same publication. Thus, non-standardization is the norm in the deployment of racial categories in contemporary genetics research. STS scholars have shown that standardization is an important tool for the extension of scientific power and authority; we conclude by arguing that nonstandardization can also be an important source of power in certain circumstances.

Authors

• Aaron L. Panofsky, University of California-Los Angeles

• Catherine Bliss, University of California-San Francisco