Researchers and other (human) actors within the apparatus of animal experimentation find themselves in a tight corner. They rely on public acceptance to promote their legitimacy and to receive funding. At the same time, those working with animal experimentation take risks by going public, fearing that the public will misunderstand their work and animal rights activists may threaten them. The dilemma that emerges between openness and secrecy is fairly prevalent in scientific culture as a whole, but the apparatus of animal experimentation presents specific patterns of technologies of secrets. The aim of the paper is to describe and analyse the meanings of secrets and openness in contemporary animal experimentation. We suggest that these secrets – or “selective openness” – can be viewed as grease in the apparatus of animal experimentation, as a unifying ingredient that permits maintenance of status quo in human/animal relations and preserves existing institutional public/science relations.
AhmedS. (2004) The Cultural Politics of Emotion. London and New York: Routledge.
2.
ArlukeA. (1990) “Uneasiness among Animal Technicians,” Laboratory Animal19: 20–39.
3.
ArlukeA. (1991) “Going into the Closet with Science: Information Control among Experimenters,” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography20: 306–30.
4.
AsdalK. (2008) “Subjected to Parliament: Experimental Medicine and the Animal Body,” Social Studies of Science38(6): 899–917.
5.
BalmerB. (2006) “A Secret Formula, a Rouge Patent and Public Knowledge about Nerve Gas: Secrecy as a Spatio-epistemic Tool,” Social Studies of Science36(5): 691–722.
6.
BauerW. M.AllumN.MillerS. (2007) “What Can We Learn from 25 Years of PUS Survey Research? Liberating and Expanding the Agenda,” Public Understanding of Science16: 79–95.
7.
BilligM.CondorS.EdwardsD.GaneM.MiddletonD.RadleyA. R. (1988) Ideological Dilemmas. London: SAGE.
8.
BirkeL.ArlukeA.MichaelM. (2007) The Sacrifice: How Scientific Experiments Transform Animals and People. West Lafayette: Purdue University Press.
9.
BraunK.SchultzS. (2010) “‘… A Certain Amount of Engineering Involved’: Constructing the Public in Participatory Governance Arrangements,” Public Understanding of Scienceforthcoming.
10.
BurchellK.FranklinS.HoldenK. (2009) Public Culture as Professional Science. London: BIOS, London School of Economics and Political Science.
11.
CritchleyC. R. (2008) “Public Opinion and Trust in Scientists: The Role of the Research Context, and the Perceived Motivation of Stem Cell Researchers,” Public Understanding of Science17: 309–27.
12.
DirkeK. (2000) De värnlösas vänner. Den svenska djurskyddsrörelsen 1875–1920 [Defenders of the defenceless. The Swedish Animal Welfare Movement 1875–1920]. Stockholm Studies in the History of Ideas. Södertälje: Almqvist & Wiksell International.
13.
ElamM.BertilssonM. (2003) “Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science: The Emerging Dimensions of Scientific Citizenship,” European Journal of Social Theory6(2): 233–51.
FranklinA. (1999) Animals and Modern Cultures. London: SAGE.
16.
GoffmanE. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New York: Prentice-Hall.
17.
GustersonH. (1998) Nuclear Rites: A Weapons Laboratory at the End of the Cold War. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
18.
HagelinJ.CarlssonH.HauJ. (2003) “An Overview of Surveys on How People View Animal Experimentation: Some Factors that May Influence the Outcome,” Public Understanding of Science12: 67–81.
19.
HarawayD. J. (1991) Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. London & New York: Routledge.
HarawayD. J. (2008) When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
22.
HilgartnerS. (2000) Science on Stage: Expert Advice as Public Drama. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
23.
HolmbergT. (2008) “A Feeling for the Animal: On Becoming an Experimentalist,” Society and Animals16(4): 316–35.
24.
HolmbergT. (2010) “Tail Tales: How Researchers Handle Transgenic Dilemmas,” New Genetics and Society29(1): 37–54.
25.
HolmbergT.IdelandM. (2009) “Transgenic Silences: The Rhetoric of Comparisons and Transgenic Mice as ‘Ordinary Treasures’,” BioSocieties4(2–3): 165–81.
26.
IdelandM. (2009) “Different Views on Ethics: How Animal Ethics is Situated in a Committee Culture,” Journal of Medical Ethics35(4): 258–61.
27.
IrwinA. (2001) “Constructing the Scientific Citizen: Science and Democracy in the Biosciences,” Public Understanding of Science10: 1–18.
28.
JasanoffS. (2006) States of Knowledge: Co-Construction of Science and Social Order. New York & London: Routledge.
29.
LindmarkI. (2009) “Få vet att det finns alternativ till djurförsök,” Forskning och Framstegno. 1.
30.
McAllister GrovesJ. (2001) “Animal Rights and the Politics of Emotion: Folk Constructs of Emotions in the Animal Rights Movement,” in GoodwinJ.JasperJ. M.PollettaF. (eds) Passionate Politics: Emotions and Social Movements, pp. 212–31. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
31.
MichaelM. (2009) “Publics Performing Publics: Of PiGs, PiPs and Politics,” Public Understanding of Science18(5): 617–31.
32.
MichaelM.BirkeL. (1994) “Accounting for Animal Experiments: Identity and the Disreputable ‘Others’,” Science, Technology, & Human Values19(2): 189–204.
33.
MichaelM.BrownN. (2005) “On Doing Scientific Citizenships: Reflections on Xenotransplantation’s Publics,” Science as Culture14(1): 39–57.
34.
NowotnyH.ScottP.GibbonsM. (2002) Re-Thinking Science: Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.
35.
PedersenH. (2007) The School and the Animal Other: An Ethnography of Human-Animal Relations in Education. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
36.
SchieleB. (2008) “On and About the Deficit Model in an Age of Free Flow,” in ChengD.. (eds) Communicating Science in Social Contexts: New Models, New Practices, pp. 93–118. Berlin: Springer Sciences.
37.
SimmelG. (1906) “The Sociology of Secrecy and of the Secret Societies,” American Journal of Sociology11: 441–98.
38.
Vetenskapsrådet (2008) Allmänhetens syn på djurförsök [Public’s View on Animal Experimentation]. Rapport 6: 2008. Stockholm: Vetenskapsrådet.
39.
VincentD. (2003) “Sekretess och öppenhet – ur den brittiska hemlighetskulturens historia,” Res Publicanr 59.
40.
WennerholmS. (2009) “On the Outskirts of Physics: Eva von Bahr as an Outsider within in Early Twentieth Century Swedish Experimental Physics,” Centaurus: An International Journal of the History of Science and its Cultural Aspects51(1): 12–36.
41.
YoungN.MatthewsR. (2007) “Experts’ Understanding of the Public: Knowledge Control in a Risk Controversy,” Public Understanding of Science16: 123–44.
