RMZ Science Works

Robert K. Merton Zentrum für Wissenschaftsforschung

Der Podcast des Robert K. Merton Zentrums für Wissenschaftsforschung

  1. Jun 10

    Susanne Wollin-Giering & Markus Hoffmann: Epistemic factors affecting the (dis)continuation of research with missing resources

    This talk discusses the possibilities of researchers to continue their work in situations where access to previously held resources is constrained. We start from the assumption that academic researchers rely on specific resources to be able to work. While many of these resources are usually provided by research organizations like universities, scientific communities remain the primary reference point for the work of researchers. The result is that some resources need to be acquired from elsewhere and that research can in some cases be continued without organizational support. The resulting situation is undertheorized by both organization and work studies (because they treat the full provision of resources for employees as a given and the content of work as unproblematic) and science studies (because of their focus on funding as the primary type of resource). We propose to fill this gap by treating the provision of resources as a variable on the one hand and by establishing a link between conditions of research, planned and conducted research processes, and necessary adaptions of researchers to changes in their conditions on the other hand. We present results from interviews in projects investigating two situations where previously secured access to resources becomes constrained: the unemployment of researchers and the COVID-19 pandemic. The two situations can be compared through conceptualizing their effect on researchers as a change of access in resources. We focus on a comparison of two fields, plant biology and ethnology, to show how different career stages, the timing of research processes, and field-specificity impact the possibilities of researchers to continue working during these situations.

    47 min
  2. Mar 4

    Veit Braun: Memories Are Made of This: Materielle Erinnerung in Biobanken

    Biobanken werden mehr und mehr zu einer allgegenwärtigen Infrastruktur in der Zoologie und anderen Biowissenschaften. Sie versprechen, materielle Forschungsdaten auf unbestimmte Zeit für künftige, noch offene, aber dennoch zu erwartende Zwecke aufzubewahren. Am Beispiel der Einrichtung einer physischen und digitalen Infrastruktur für gefrorene Proben tierischen Materials geht dieser Vortrag der Frage nach, wie die Zukunft die Vergangenheit vorwegnimmt und wie gefrorene Objekte entsprechend gestaltet werden. Indem ich die Biobank zwischen den alltäglichen Routinen der Konservierung in einem Forschungslabor und den "trockenen" und "nassen" Sammlungen von Naturkundemuseen verorte, argumentiere ich, dass eingefrorene Forschungsobjekte auf zwei verschiedene Arten konserviert werden müssen: Die Nichtverfügbarkeit von Kryo-Objekten in Kühllagern zwingt Forscher*innen dazu, physische Proben („Inhalte“) unabhängig von Metadaten („Kontext“) zu behandeln. Gleichzeitig aber müssen sie eine Verbindung zwischen ihnen aufrechterhalten, die ihre Wiedervereinigung nach dem Auftauen ermöglicht. Das Ergebnis ist ein gespaltenes Objekt, das ein Doppelleben zwischen Minusgraden und Raumtemperatur führt und nur durch die Oberfläche spezieller Kunststoffbehälter verbunden ist. Indem er der Herstellung von Kryo-Objekten nachgeht, versucht sich dieser Vortrag an einer Reflexion über Joanna Radins "geplanten Rückblick" als Praxis.

    33 min
  3. Feb 18

    Paula Muhr: Limits to the Circulation of Epistemic Critique in the Recent Reanalyses of the EHT Images of the M87* Black Hole

    In April 2019, the Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) Collaboration that gathered over two hundred international scientists famously revealed the first empirical images of a black hole—a mysterious cosmic object thus far regarded ‘unseeable’. To create these revolutionary images that visualise the immediate surrounding of the black hole at the centre of the galaxy Messier 87, the EHT team used a constellation of seven radio telescopes that spanned the Earth and then spent two years algorithmically reconstructing empirically reliable images from the thus collected non-visual data. To obtain valid imaging results, the EHT team deployed multiple methodologies during the image reconstruction process, which all delivered sufficiently consistent results. Apart from revealing their final images to the public, the team also made their processed data and algorithms accessible to the public. In 2022, five studies authored by scientists who were not members of the EHT team were published. Each study focused on reanalysing the publicly available EHT data, testing if they would obtain sufficiently similar images of the black hole. The stated purpose of these epistemic critiques was to verify the epistemic truth claims of the EHT’s final images of the black hole. The authors of each study thereby deployed different approaches. Some replicated the procedure developed by the EHT team; others developed alternative algorithmic techniques for reconstructing images from the EHT non-visual data. Four of the five critical reanalyses converged on their findings by obtaining images that were sufficiently similar to the initial EHT images published in 2019. One study diverged in their results and was subsequently criticised by the EHT team for its methodology. As my paper will show, this circulation of the epistemic critique in the community of astrophysicists focused on imaging black holes is far more than a contrived academic exercise. Instead, it is of critical importance for the epistemological consolidation of the currently emerging research field of black hole imaging and, with its fine-grained methodological insights, has the potential to inform future EHT analyses and results. However, while the importance of critical replication studies for the community of specialists is difficult to overestimate, this type of discipline-specific epistemic critique remains highly hermetic. Since the implications and import of such a critique remain opaque for non-specialists, its circulation remains constrained to the members of the scientific community.

    35 min

About

Der Podcast des Robert K. Merton Zentrums für Wissenschaftsforschung