Knowledge and knowing in cancer research: an organizational communication perspective

Within the framework of Organizational Communication, there is an increasing interest in knowledge and knowing that will not soon fade (Kuhn 2014). In line with this interest, the present research used the method of Discursive Psychology (Potter & Wetherell, 1987), aiming at studying trivialization in an organizational context, as a strategy to know about knowing. The cancer research lab was targeted for our case study. Starting from Latour & Woolgar (1979)'s description of how scientific facts are "sociologically (rather than logically) determined", our research used Garfinkel (1967)’s breaching experiment as a technique to open black-boxed scientific facts and examine the trivializations they encompass. Through participant observation, we ultimately singled out 3 cases of trivialization. Semi structured interviews and discourse analysis were conducted to understand the dynamic of trivialization around the 3 cases. The study was then able to describe how such scientific matters happen to be trivialized, at three levels: a) (inter)organizationally; b) individually and c) in group. The research was able to outline the consequences of the studied trivializations on cancer research. It also detailed the outcomes of the detrivialization triggered by our research. Finally, the research suggested that studying (de)trivialization can be an effective strategy to know about knowing.


Paperback - In English 25.70 €

Specifications


Publisher
Presses universitaires de Louvain
Author
Salaheddine Mnasri,
Set
Thèses de l'Université catholique de Louvain (UCL)
Language
English
Supporting Website
Publisher’s website for a specified work
BISAC Subject Heading
MED062000 MEDICAL / Oncology
Onix Audience Codes
06 Professional and scholarly
CLIL (Version 2013-2019)
3165 MEDECINE, PHARMACIE, PARAMEDICAL, MEDECINE VETERINAIRE
Title First Published
19 October 2019

Paperback


Publication Date
19 October 2019
ISBN-13
9782875585806
Illustrations
1 bibliography/ 1 glossary
Extent
Main content page count : 340
Legal Copyright Date
428 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
Code
95292
Dimensions
16 x 24 cm
Weight
542 grams
List Price
25.70 €
ONIX XML
Version 2.1, Version 3

Google Book Preview


Write a commentary

Contents


1. INTRODUCTION………………...………………………………………..…….01
1.1 Background……………..……………...…………...……………………01
1.2 A case study: How can the (de)trivialization practices
be useful to know about knowing?...........................................02
1.3 Defining (de)trivialization…...……….………..…….....................02
1.4 Triviality across disciplines…………….…….…............………04
1.5 Our epistemological stand point………...…………...………06
1.5.1 Social Constructionism (our philosophical
foundation)………………...…...……………………06
1.5.2 Discursive Psychology (our theoretical
framework)………….………………………………………….07
1.5.3 Communication as Constitutive of
Organizations (our organizing theory)……..........11
2. LITERATURE REVIEW……….………………….....……………….....…15
2.1 Communication throughout the history of Learning
theories…….…...…..………………………………………….….………15
2.1.1 Behaviorism: (conditioning)……………...……...…15
2.1.2 Cognitivism: (transmission).…………....………..…17
2.1.3 Constructivism: (construction)…….…...…….........21
2.1.4 Humanism: (learner-centered construction)...22
2.1.5 Social Constructionism (intersubjective
construction)…..…..……..….................................................24
2.2 Communication and knowing……….......…….……....…….…27
2.3 (de)trivialization and knowing……..…..…….……...…………31
2.3.1 Knowledge and knowing in Organizational
Communication……………………………………………31
2.3.2 Breaching experiment to "make commonplace
scenes visible"…...........................................................……33
2.3.3 (de)Trivialization: from “Groupthink” to “real
meeting dialogue”……………………...…………………34
2.3.4 Trivialization: a socio-psychological
phenomenon….....……………..……..………..………...…36
2.4 Literature review summary……………………….....…………38
Knowledge and knowing in cancer research
3. CASE STUDY………………………..………………………………..……...…….41
3.1 Approach………………………………………….………………...…..…41
3.2 Methodology…………...……………………………..…………….....…42
3.2.1 The Research question…………………..…….…….…46
3.2.2 Observation…………….……....................................………46
3.2.3 Data collection…...………………………………….……54
3.2.4 Semi-structured interviews….………………….……56
3.2.5 Transcription…………….……….....................................…57
3.2.6 Coding……………………………...……………………….….58
3.3 Analysis……………………………………………….………………….....60
Case 1: Why 5% of co2 for cell culture?.….………….63
3.3.1 Background………………...…………..……………………63
3.3.2 Interviews analyses (case 1)………....………….…..67
3.3.2.1 Accounts variation (case 1)…….……..67
3.3.2.2 Synchronic inconsistencies and
contradictions (case 1)…….......………..78
3.3.2.3 Diachronic inconsistencies and
validation (case 1).......................................89
3.3.3 Exploring the (de)trivialization dynamic
(case 1).....……….…………………...………........…….…….101
3.3.4 Primary findings (case 1) ………………………....…117
Case 2: How appropriate is the medium
usage?.....................................................................….. 121
3.3.5 Background (case 2)………....…...…..…….…..….…..121
3.3.6 Interviews analyses (case 2)…...………………......124
3.3.6.1 Accounts variation (case 2)......……..125
3.3.6.2 Synchronic inconsistencies and
contradictions (case 2)…………………140
3.3.6.3 Diachronic inconsistencies and
validatation (case 2)………………..……150
3.3.7 Exploring the (de)trivialization dynamic
(case 2)…............................................................................…161
3.3.8 Primary findings (case 2)……………………..……184
Knowledge and knowing in cancer research
Case 3: Do you own your research?...............................187
3.3.9 Background (case 3)…………………..………..…….187
3.3.10 Interviews analyses (case 3)………..……193
3.3.10.1 Accounts variation (case 3)…….....194
3.3.10.2 Synchronic inconsistencies and
contradictions (case 3)………..….…218
3.3.10.3 Diachronic inconsistencies and
validation (case 3)…..…....................…232
3.3.11 Exploring the (de)trivialization
dynamic (case 3)…………………………......254
3.3.12 Primary findings (case 3)………...…..……273
4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ……………………………………277
4.1 Findings………………………….……………...…….......277
4.2 Discussions……………...……………….........…………291
4.2.1 ANT and our research...…...……291
4.2.2 The actor-network
Traceability...…................................…295
4.2.3 From Callon's “mobilisation”
to Cooren’s“ventriloquism”...303
4.2.4 Research merits and
limitations……………..….…..………307
5 WRAP-UP………………………………………………….....…..........…...………311
GLOSSARY OF BIOLOGY TERMS…...……………..……………….317
REFERENCES………………...……………..…….…………….……………….......321