Most lay people don't have the ability to evaluate scientific conclusions.
Scientists can disagree with one another's conclusions.
About Thomas Gieryn :
Tom Gieryn retired in 2015 as Rudy Professor of Sociology and Adjunct Professor in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science. At the time, he also served as Vice Provost for Faculty and Academic Affairs and, before that, he served as Department Chair. Tom earned his Ph.D. from Columbia University in 1979, and has been at IU ever since--with visiting professorships at Cornell University, Nankai University (Tianjin, China) and Twente University (Holland), and a year at Princeton's Institute for Advanced Study. Tom does research on the cultural authority of science and on the significance of place for human behavior and social change. His book Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility On the Line (University of Chicago Press, 1999) won the Robert K. Merton Book Award from the Section on Science, Knowledge and Technology of the American Sociological Association (the prize is named after Tom's mentor at Columbia). Tom’s second book is Truth-Spots: How Places Make People Believe, also published by the University of Chicago Press, 2018.
What is scientific credibility?
To determine credibility, scientific studies need to be assessed along (at least) the following three dimensions: (1) method and data transparency, (2) analytic reproducibility and robustness, and
(3) effect replicability
Sociology of Science :
Sociology of science studies the social organization of science, the relationships between science and other social institutions, social influences on the content of scientific knowledge, and public policy regarding science. The definition of the term “science” is problematic. Science can refer to a changing body of shared knowledge about nature or to the methods used to obtain that knowledge; in that form, science has existed for millennia. Research on “indigenous scientific knowledge” is reviewed in Watson-Verran and Turnbull (1995). Sociologists of science are more likely to define science in institutional terms, and most research in that area studies those who work in differentiated social institutions. The “demarcation” problem of distinguishing between science and non science persists. Gieryn (1995, 1998) argues that scientists and their advocates continually engage in contested “boundary work” to demarcate science. He discusses the rhetorical and organizational devices used in those contests; thus, scientists are likely to emphasize the disinterested search for knowledge in their attempts to distinguish science from technology and stress the utility of scientific knowledge in their attempts to distinguish it from religion. Gieryn argues against the notion that there are “essential” features of science that determine the outcome of those contests; these “essential features” are instead “provisional and contextual results of successful boundary-work” (1995,).
Learn more about Sociology :
brainly.com/question/13665562
#SPJ4
