University of California-Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA.
Sociol Health Illn. 2010 Jan;32(1):106-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01185.x. Epub 2009 Nov 4.
The advent of scientific research on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has contributed to the current state of flux regarding the distinction between biomedicine and CAM. CAM research scientists play a unique role in reconfiguring this boundary by virtue of their training in biomedical sciences on the one hand and knowledge of CAM on the other. This study uses qualitative interviews to explore how CAM researchers perceive and negotiate challenges inherent in their work. Our analysis considers eight NIH-funded CAM researchers': (1) personal engagement with CAM, (2) social reactions towards perceived suspiciousness of research colleagues and (3) strategic methodological efforts to counteract perceived biases encountered during the peer review process. In response to peer suspicion, interviews showed CAM researchers adjusting their self-presentation style, highlighting their proximity to science, and carefully 'self-censoring' or reframing their unconventional beliefs. Because of what was experienced as peer reviewer bias, interviews showed CAM researchers making conciliatory efforts to adopt heightened methodological stringency. As CAM researchers navigate a broadening of biomedicine's boundaries, while still needing to maintain the identity and research methods of a biomedical scientist, this article explores the constant pressure on CAM researchers to appear and act a little more 'scientific'.
补充和替代医学(CAM)的科学研究的出现,导致了当前在生物医学和 CAM 之间的区分上的不稳定状态。CAM 研究科学家通过他们在生物医学科学方面的培训和对 CAM 的了解,在重新配置这一边界方面发挥了独特的作用。本研究使用定性访谈来探讨 CAM 研究人员如何感知和协商他们工作中固有的挑战。我们的分析考虑了八位 NIH 资助的 CAM 研究人员的情况:(1)个人参与 CAM 的情况,(2)对被认为是研究同事可疑的社会反应,以及(3)在同行评审过程中为克服被认为存在偏见而采取的战略方法努力。由于受到同行的怀疑,访谈显示 CAM 研究人员调整了他们的自我表现风格,强调他们与科学的接近程度,并仔细地“自我审查”或重新构建他们的非传统信仰。由于被认为是同行评审员的偏见,访谈显示 CAM 研究人员做出了和解的努力,以采用更高的方法严谨性。随着 CAM 研究人员在拓宽生物医学的边界的同时,仍然需要保持生物医学科学家的身份和研究方法,本文探讨了对 CAM 研究人员的持续压力,要求他们表现得更“科学”一点。