• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

知识社会中的专业技能问题。

The Problem of Expertise in Knowledge Societies.

作者信息

Grundmann Reiner

机构信息

School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD UK.

出版信息

Minerva. 2017;55(1):25-48. doi: 10.1007/s11024-016-9308-7. Epub 2016 Sep 27.

DOI:10.1007/s11024-016-9308-7
PMID:28239194
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5306236/
Abstract

This paper puts forward a theoretical framework for the analysis of expertise and experts in contemporary societies. It argues that while prevailing approaches have come to see expertise in various forms and functions, they tend to neglect the broader historical and societal context, and importantly the relational aspect of expertise. This will be discussed with regard to influential theoretical frameworks, such as laboratory studies, regulatory science, lay expertise, post-normal science, and honest brokers. An alternative framework of expertise is introduced, showing the limitations of existing frameworks and emphasizing one crucial element of all expertise, which is their role in guiding action.

摘要

本文提出了一个用于分析当代社会中的专业知识和专家的理论框架。它认为,尽管主流方法已开始从各种形式和功能的角度看待专业知识,但它们往往忽视了更广泛的历史和社会背景,重要的是忽视了专业知识的关系层面。这将结合有影响力的理论框架进行讨论,如实验室研究、监管科学、外行专业知识、后正常科学和诚实中介。本文引入了一个替代性的专业知识框架,揭示了现有框架的局限性,并强调了所有专业知识的一个关键要素,即它们在指导行动中的作用。

相似文献

1
The Problem of Expertise in Knowledge Societies.知识社会中的专业技能问题。
Minerva. 2017;55(1):25-48. doi: 10.1007/s11024-016-9308-7. Epub 2016 Sep 27.
2
The patient-physician interaction as a meeting of experts: one solution to the problem of patient non-adherence.患者与医生的互动作为专家之间的会面:解决患者不依从问题的一种方法。
J Eval Clin Pract. 2016 Aug;22(4):558-64. doi: 10.1111/jep.12561. Epub 2016 May 18.
3
Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.人类健康与环境风险的风险管理框架。
J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003 Nov-Dec;6(6):569-720. doi: 10.1080/10937400390208608.
4
The social construction of competence: Conceptions of science and expertise among proponents of the low-carbohydrate high-fat diet in Finland.能力的社会建构:芬兰低碳水高脂肪饮食支持者的科学与专业观念
Public Underst Sci. 2016 Apr;25(3):332-45. doi: 10.1177/0963662514558167. Epub 2014 Nov 21.
5
[Specialist and lay ethical expertise in public health: issues and challenges for discourse ethics].[公共卫生领域的专业与非专业伦理专业知识:话语伦理学的问题与挑战]
Sante Publique. 2012 Jan-Feb;24(1):49-61.
6
Dead by 50: lay expertise and breast cancer screening.早逝 50 岁:专家建议和乳腺癌筛查。
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Apr;72(8):1351-8. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.02.024. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
7
Reconfiguring health knowledges? Contemporary modes of self-care as 'everyday fringe medicine'.重新配置健康知识?当代自我保健模式即“日常边缘医学”。
Public Underst Sci. 2020 Jul;29(5):508-523. doi: 10.1177/0963662520934752. Epub 2020 Jun 27.
8
[Differences in psychiatric expertise of responsibility: Assessment and initial hypotheses through a review of literature].[责任的精神病学专业知识差异:通过文献综述进行评估和初步假设]
Encephale. 2015 Jun;41(3):244-50. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2015.03.002. Epub 2015 Apr 8.
9
The problem of evidence-based medicine: directions for social science.循证医学问题:社会科学的方向
Soc Sci Med. 2004 Sep;59(5):1059-69. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2003.12.002.
10
When science becomes too easy: Science popularization inclines laypeople to underrate their dependence on experts.当科学变得过于简单:科学普及使外行人低估了他们对专家的依赖。
Public Underst Sci. 2017 Nov;26(8):1003-1018. doi: 10.1177/0963662516680311. Epub 2016 Nov 30.

引用本文的文献

1
The Power of Naming: Discursive Politics From the Perspective of Expertise in an Intellectual Disability Advocacy Field.命名的力量:从智力残疾倡导领域的专业知识视角看话语政治
Sociol Health Illn. 2025 May;47(4):e70048. doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.70048.
2
Social Listening to Enhance Access to Appropriate Pandemic Information Among Culturally Diverse Populations: Case Study From Finland.通过社交倾听提高文化多元人群获取适当大流行信息的能力:来自芬兰的案例研究
JMIR Infodemiology. 2022 Jul 8;2(2):e38343. doi: 10.2196/38343. eCollection 2022 Jul-Dec.
3
When scientific experts come to be media stars: An evolutionary model tested by analysing coronavirus media coverage across Italian newspapers.当科学专家成为媒体明星:通过分析意大利报纸上的冠状病毒媒体报道来检验的进化模型。
PLoS One. 2023 Apr 26;18(4):e0284841. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284841. eCollection 2023.
4
Mental Health Experts as Objects of Epistemic Injustice-The Case of Autism Spectrum Condition.作为认知不公正对象的心理健康专家——以自闭症谱系障碍为例
Diagnostics (Basel). 2023 Mar 1;13(5):927. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13050927.
5
Knowledge, Expertise and Science Advice During COVID-19: In Search of Epistemic Justice for the 'Wicked' Problems of Post-Normal Times.新冠疫情期间的知识、专业技能与科学建议:探寻后常态时代“棘手”问题的认知正义
Soc Epistemol. 2022 Oct 10;36(6):671-685. doi: 10.1080/02691728.2022.2103750. eCollection 2022.
6
What are the essential components to implement individual-focused interventions for well-being and burnout in critical care healthcare professionals? A realist expert opinion.对重症护理医护人员实施以个人为中心的幸福与职业倦怠干预措施的关键要素有哪些?一项现实主义专家意见。
Front Psychol. 2022 Sep 28;13:991946. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.991946. eCollection 2022.
7
Reflections on Reflection: Clarifying and Promoting Use in Experienced Coaches.关于反思的反思:澄清并促进其在经验丰富的教练中的应用
Front Psychol. 2022 May 4;13:867720. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.867720. eCollection 2022.
8
The Organic Turn: Coping With Pandemic and Non-pandemic Challenges by Integrating Evidence-, Theory-, Experience-, and Context-Based Knowledge in Advising Health Policy.有机转变:通过整合循证、理论、经验和基于情境的知识,应对大流行和非大流行挑战,为卫生政策提供咨询。
Front Public Health. 2021 Nov 24;9:727427. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.727427. eCollection 2021.
9
Exploring the Relationship (and Power Dynamic) Between Researchers and Public Partners Working Together in Applied Health Research Teams.探索应用健康研究团队中研究人员与公共合作伙伴之间的关系(以及权力动态)。
Front Sociol. 2019 Mar 29;4:20. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2019.00020. eCollection 2019.
10
Teasing out Artificial Intelligence in Medicine: An Ethical Critique of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Medicine.医学中的人工智能:对医学中人工智能和机器学习的伦理批判。
J Bioeth Inq. 2021 Mar;18(1):121-139. doi: 10.1007/s11673-020-10080-1. Epub 2021 Jan 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Science and regulation. Uncapping conflict of interest?科学与监管。消除利益冲突?
Science. 2013 Jun 7;340(6137):1172-3. doi: 10.1126/science.1231955.
2
[Lay expertise in patient organizations: an instrument for health democracy].[患者组织中的外行专业知识:健康民主的一种工具]
Sante Publique. 2012 Jan-Feb;24(1):69-74.
3
Mark B. Brown, Science in Democracy. Expertise, Institutions, and Representation: MIT Press, Cambridge, MA., and London, 2009.马克·B·布朗,《民主中的科学:专业知识、制度与代表》:麻省理工学院出版社,马萨诸塞州剑桥市及伦敦,2009年。
Minerva. 2011 Sep;49(3):349-354. doi: 10.1007/s11024-011-9179-x. Epub 2011 Aug 9.
4
The construction of lay expertise: AIDS activism and the forging of credibility in the reform of clinical trials.外行专业知识的构建:艾滋病维权行动与临床试验改革中可信度的塑造
Sci Technol Human Values. 1995 Autumn;20(4):408-37. doi: 10.1177/016224399502000402.