This exploratory study examines the significance of science to parents whose children were recently diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder. It asks: (1) In what manner did science emerge in parents’ concerns and resources as they attempted to understand and advocate for their children? (2) Did some parents engage with science in a qualitatively deeper or more intense manner? Using longitudinal data from interviews and a novel data collection strategy called engagement mapping, it shows that parents asked questions and used resources that were strongly associated with science, but these were vastly outnumbered by “near-science” concerns and resources that mingled meanings from science and daily life. Several parents in the study wove together concerns and resources in an iterative pattern referred to here as progressive engagement with science.
AbbedutoLSeltzerMKraussM. (2004) Psychological well-being and coping in mothers of youths with autism, Down syndrome, or fragile X syndrome. American Journal on Mental Retardation109(3): 237–254.
2.
BarbourR (2001) Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog?British Medical Journal322: 1115–1117.
3.
BrownPMcCormickSMayerB. (2006) “A lab of our own”: Environmental causation of breast cancer and challenges to the dominant epidemiological paradigm. Science, Technology, & Human Values31(5): 499–536.
4.
CarpiniMCookFJacobsL (2004) Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science7: 315–344.
5.
CasidayRCresswellTWilsonDPanter-BrickC (2006) A survey of UK parental attitudes to the MMR vaccine and trust in medical authority. Vaccine24(2): 177–184.
6.
ClarkeC (2010) A case of conflicting norms? Mobilizing and accountability information in newspaper coverage of the autism-vaccine controversy. Public Understanding of Science20(5): 609–626.
7.
EpsteinS (1998) Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
8.
EpsteinS (2008) Patient groups and health movements. In: HackettEAmsterdamskaOLynchMWajcmanJ (eds) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd edition.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 499–540.
9.
GalisonP (1997) Image and Logic: The Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10.
GierynT (1999) Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
GormanM (2010) Trading Zones and Interactional Expertise. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
GrayD (1995) Lay conceptions of autism: Parents’ explanatory models. Medical Anthropology16: 99–118.
13.
GrayD (1998) Autism and the Family: Problems, Prospects, and Coping with the Disorder. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
14.
HeinrichsNBertramHKuschelA. (2005) Parent recruitment and retention in a universal prevention program for child behavior and emotional problems: Barriers to research and program participation. Prevention Science6(4): 275–286.
15.
IrwinAMichaelM (2003) Science, Social Theory and Public Knowledge. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
16.
JenkinsE (1999) School science, citizenship and the public understanding of science. International Journal of Science Education21: 703–710.
17.
KingMBearmanP (2009) Diagnostic change and the increased prevalence of autism. International Journal of Epidemiology38(5): 1224–1234.
18.
LasloEBaram-TsabariALewensteinB (2011) A growth medium for the message: Online science journalism affordances for exploring public discourse of science and ethics. Journalism12: 847–871.
19.
LatourB (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20.
LaytonDJenkinsEMacgillS. (1993) Inarticulate Science? Perspectives on the Public Understanding of Science and Some Implications for Science Education. Driffield: Studies in Education.
21.
MaslachCSchaufeliWLeiterM (2001) Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology52: 397–422.
22.
MichaelM (1996) Ignoring science: Discourses of ignorance in the public understanding of science. In: IrwinAWynneB (eds) Misunderstanding Science? The Public Reconstruction of Science and Technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 107–125.
23.
MoscoviciS ([1961] 2008) Psychoanalysis: Its Image and Its Public. Cambridge: Polity Press.
24.
National Science Board (2008) Science and Engineering Indicators 2008. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
25.
SilvermanC (2011) Understanding Autism: Parents, Doctors, and the History of a Disorder. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
26.
SnowALecavalierL (2011) Comparing autism, PDD-NOS, and other developmental disabilities on parent-reported behavior problems: Little evidence for ASD subtype validity. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disabilities41(3): 302–310.
27.
StarSGriesemerJ (1989) Institutional ecology, “translations” and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907–39. Social Studies of Science19(3): 387–420.
28.
StraussACorbinJ (2008) Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 3rd edition.Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
29.
WeinbergA (1972) Science and trans-science. Minerva10(2): 209–222.
30.
WynneB (1992) Misunderstood misunderstandings: Social identities and public uptake of science. Public Understanding of Science1(3): 281–304.
