‘‘Anecdotal evidence’’ has become a central point of contention in two recent controversies over science and technology (We follow Nelkin (1992, 10) in referring to our cases as controversies over science and technology.) in the United Kingdom and a contact point between individuals, expert institutions, and policy decisions. We argue that the term is central to the management of the boundary between experts and nonexperts, with consequences for ideas of public engagement and participation. This article reports on two separate pieces of qualitative social research into recent UK public risk controversies with the aim of unfolding the processes by which anecdotal evidence comes to be defined. We do not define anecdotal evidence as an epistemic category that exists prior to the public controversies themselves; rather, we aim to show how the term is constructed and contested by expert and nonexpert actors. We find that anecdotal evidence comes to be accepted (albeit in different ways) by the main actors as an epistemic category, yet that it is multidimensional, open to interpretation as subjective reports, as an indicator of expert ignorance, as a source of novel hypotheses and as a set of political claims for recognition and inclusion. We conclude that the flexibility of anecdotal evidence at the boundary between science and its publics can offer opportunities for participation and engagement, as well as exclusion and alienation.
Arksey, H.1994. Expert and lay participation in the construction of medical knowledge. Sociology of Health and Illness16 (4): 448-68.
2.
Bardenheier, B., H. Yusuf, B. Schwartz, D. Gust, L. Barker, and L. Rodewald.2004. Are parental vaccine safety concerns associated with receipt of measles-mumps-rubella, diphtheria and tetanus toxoids with acellular pertussis, or hepatitis B vaccines by children? Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine158 (6): 569-75.
3.
Beck, U.1995. Ecological enlightenment: Essays on the politics of the risk society. Trans. M. Ritter. Atlantic Highlands, NJ : Humanities Press.
4.
Bellaby, P.2003. Communication and miscommunication of risk: Understanding UK parents’ attitudes to combined MMR vaccination. British Medical Journal327 (7417): 725-8.
5.
Brown, P.1990. Popular epidemiology: Community response to toxic waste-induced disease. In The sociology of health and illness in critical perspective, ed. P. Conrad, and R. Kern, 77-85. New York: St Martin’s Press.
6.
---. 1995. Popular epidemiology, toxic waste and social movements . In Medicine, health and risk: Sociological approaches, ed. J. Gabe, 91-112. Oxford: Blackwell.
7.
Brown, P., S. Zavestoski, S. McCormick, B. Mayer, R. Morello-Frosch, and R. Gasior Altman .2004. Embodied health movements: New approaches to social movements in health. Sociology of Health and Illness26 (1): 50-80.
8.
Brownlie, J., and A. Howson.2005. ‘‘Leaps of faith’’ and MMR: An empirical study of trust. Sociology39 (2): 221-39.
9.
Burgess, A.2004. Cellular phones, public fears, and a culture of precaution . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Busby, H., G. Williams, and A. Rogers.1997. Bodies of knowledge: Lay and biomedical understandings of musculoskeletal disorders. In The sociology of medical science and technology, ed. M. A. Elston, 79-99. Oxford: Blackwell .
11.
Calnan, M.1987. Health and illness: The lay perspective. London: Tavistock.
12.
Collins, H.M., and R. Evans.2002. The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science32 (2): 235-96.
13.
Couch, S.R., and S. Kroll-Smith.1997. Environmental movements and expert knowledge: Evidence for a new populism. In Living with industry, coping with chemicals: Environmental movements and expert knowledge, ed. R. O. Washington, and J. N. Levine, 155-74. New Orleans: University of New Orleans/College of Urban and Public Affairs .
14.
Deer, B.2004. Revealed: MMR research scandal. Sunday Times, February 22.
15.
Dyer, C.1994. Families win support for vaccine compensation claim . British Medical Journal309 (6957): 759.
16.
Epstein, S.1996. Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge . Berkeley/ Los Angeles / London: University of California Press.
17.
Evans, M., H. Stoddart, L. Condon, E. Freeman, M. Grizzell, and R. Mullen.2001. Parents’ perspectives on the MMR immunisation: A focus group study. British Journal of General Practice51 (472): 904-10.
18.
Gieryn, T.1983. Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists . American Sociological Review48 (6): 781-95.
19.
---. 1995. Boundaries of science. In Handbook of science and technology studies, ed. S. Jasanoff, G. E. Markle, J. C. Peterson , and T. Pinch, 393-443. London /Thousand Oaks/ New Delhi : SAGE.
20.
Gross, J., and S. Strom.2007. New York Times, June 18, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/18/us/18autism.html?hp (accessed June 18, 2007).
21.
---. 2001. Boundary organisations in environmental policy and science: An introduction. Science, Technology, & Human Values26 (4): 399-408.
22.
Haraway, D.1991. Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature . New York: Routledge.
23.
Herman, JL1992. Trauma and recovery. New York : Basic Books.
Horton, R.2004. MMR Science and Fiction: Exploring the Vaccine Crisis . London: Granta.
26.
House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology.2000. Science and society. London : The Stationery Office.
27.
Iegmp.2000. The independent expert group on mobile phones report, mobile phones and health (the Stewart report). Chilton: National Radiological Protection Board.
28.
Irwin, A.1995. Citizen science. A study of people, expertise and sustainable development. London/ New York: Routledge.
29.
Irwin, A., and M. Michael.2003. Science, social theory and public knowledge. Maidenhead/ Philadelphia : Open University Press.
30.
Irwin, A., P. Simmons, and G. Walker.1999. Faulty environments and risk reasoning: The local understanding of industrial hazards. Environment and Planning A31 (7): 1311-26.
31.
Jasanoff, S.1990. The fifth branch: Science advisers as policy makers . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
32.
---. 1997. Civilization and madness: The Great BSE scare of 1996 . Public Understanding of Science6 (3): 221-232.
33.
Kroll-Smith, S., and H.H. Floyd.1997. Bodies in protest: Environmental illness and the struggle over medical knowledge. New York: New York University Press.
34.
Mhra.1999. Report of the working party on MMR vaccine. London: Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency.
35.
Monaghan, L.1999. Challenging medicine? Body building, drugs and risk. Sociology of Health and Illness21 (6): 707-34.
36.
Murch, S., M. Thomson, and J. Walker-Smith .1998. Author’s Reply. Lancet351 (9106): 908.
37.
Nelkin, D.1992. Science, technology and political conflict: Analysing the issues. In Controversy: The politics of technical decisions, ed. Dorothy. Nelkin, 9-25. London/ Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: SAGE .
38.
Pareek, M., and H.M. Pattison.2000. The two-dose measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) immunisation schedule: Factors affecting maternal intention to vaccinate . The British Journal of General Practice50 (461): 969-71.
39.
Petts, J., and S. Niemeyer.2004. Health risk communication and amplification: Learning from the MMR vaccination controversy. Health, Risk and Society6 (1): 7-23.
40.
Poltorak, M., M. Leach, and J. Fairhead.2004. MMR ‘‘choices’’ in Brighton: Understanding public engagement with vaccination science and delivery. Brighton: University of Sussex.
41.
Poortinga, W., and N. Pidgeon.2003. Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation. Risk Analysis23 (5): 961-72.
42.
Popay, J., G. Williams, C. Thomas, and T. Gatrell.1998. Theorising inequalities in health: The place of lay knowledge. Sociology of Health and Illness20 (5): 619-44.
43.
Prior, L.2003. Belief, knowledge and expertise: The emergence of the lay expert in medical sociology. Sociology of Health and Illness25 (Silver Anniversary Issue): 41-57.
44.
Ramsay, M., J. Yarwood, D. Lewis, H. Campbell, and J. White.2002. Parental confidence in measles, mumps and rubella vaccine. The British Journal of General Practice52 (484): 912-6.
45.
Silverman, C., and J. Brosco.2007. Understanding autism: Parents and pediatricians in historical perspective. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine161 (4): 392-98.
46.
SMC.2002. MMR: Learning lessons. London: Science Media Centre.
47.
Solomon, S.M., and E.J. Hackett.1996. Setting boundaries between science and law: Lessons from Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Science, Technology, & Human Values21 (2): 131-56.
48.
Stilgoe, J.2005. Controlling mobile phone health risks in the UK: A fragile discourse of compliance. Science and Public Policy32 (1): 55-64.
49.
---. 2007. The (co-)production of public uncertainty: UK scientific advice on mobile phone health risks. Public Understanding of Science16 (1): 45-61.
50.
Taylor, B., E. Miller, R. Lingam, N. Andrews, A. Simmons, and J. Stowe.2002. Measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and bowel problems in children with autism: Population study. British Medical Journal324 (7334): 396.
51.
Tesh, S.2000. Uncertain hazards. Ithaca, NY : Cornell University Press.
52.
Thrower, D.2004. MMR and autism: The debate continues. Lancet363 (9408): 567-8.
53.
Touraine, A.1995. The crisis of ‘‘progress.’’ In Resistance to new technology: Nuclear power, information technology and biotechnology , ed. M. Bauer, 45-56. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
54.
Vernon, J.G.2003. Immunisation policy: From compliance to concordance ? British Journal of General Practice53 (490): 399-404.
Wakefield, A.J., S.H. Murch, A. Anthony, J. Linnell, D.M. Casson, M. Malik, and M. Berelowitz, et al. 1998. Ileal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children. Lancet351 (9103): 637-41.
57.
Watson, P.The independent, Friday, June 28 2002 .
58.
Williams, G.H., and P.H. Wood.1986. Common-sense beliefs about illness: A mediating role for the doctor. Lancet2 (8521-22): 1435-7.
59.
Wynne, B.1992. Risk and social learning: Reification to engagement . In Social theories of risk, ed. S. Krimsky, and D. Golding, 275-97. Westport /Connecticut/London: Praeger Publishers.
60.
---. 2005. Risk as globalizing ‘‘democratic’’ discourse? Framing subjects and citizens. In Science and citizens: Globalization and the challenge of engagement, ed. M. Leach, I. Scoones, and B. Wynne, 66-82. London: Zed Books.
