Analysis of the “comments and replies” sections of social science journals can assist understanding of the nature of epistemological and community-related debates and field development at the edge of knowledge contexts. Comments on articles and replies by authors occur at the margin, after articles have been deemed good enough to publish, and this focus of argumentation provides valuable insight to the process of field development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bazerman, C.
1993. Intertextual self-fashioning: Gould and Lewontin's representations of the literature. In Understanding scientific prose, edited by Jack Selzer, 20-41. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
2.
Berkenkotter, C.
, Hucklin, T.N., & Ackerman, J. 1991. Social context and socially constructed texts: The initiation of a graduate student into a writing research community. In Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities, edited by Charles Bazerman and James Paradis, 191-215. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
3.
Caws, M.A.
1989. The art of interference: Stressed readings in verbal and visual texts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
Charney, D.
1993. A study in rhetorical reading: How evolutionists read “The Sprandrels of San Marco.” In Understanding scientific prose, edited by Jack Selzer, 203-231. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
5.
Code, L.
1991. What can she know? Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
6.
Fleck, L.
1979. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
7.
Fuchs, S.
1992. The professional quest for truth: A social theory of science and knowledge. Albany: SUNY Press.
8.
Lyne, J.
1990. Bio-rhetorics: Moralizing the life sciences. In The rhetorical turn: Invention and persuasion in the conduct of inquiry, edited by Herbert W. Simons, 35-57. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Rouse, J.
1987. Knowledge and power: Toward a political philosophy of science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
10.
Shweder, R.
1986. Divergent rationalities. In Metatheory in social science: Pluralisms and subjectivities, edited by Donald Fiske and Richard Shweder, 163-196. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Silverman, R.1988. Author-field interaction following publication in higher education journals. Higher Education17:361-375.
12.
Silverman, R.
1991. Desktop publishing: Its impact on the academic community. In Desktop publishing in the university, edited by Joan N. Burstyn, 55-63. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University School of Education (distributed by Syracuse University Press).
13.
Silverman, R.1993a. Contexts of knowing: Their shape and substance. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization14:372-385.
14.
Silverman, R.1993b. The voice below “the voice”: Authors' reactions to peer review. The Review of Higher Education16:499-512.
