Communicative patterns and social networks between scientists and technicians in a culture of care: discussing morality across a hierarchy of occupational spaces

Abstract

Communication between scientists and animal technicians is considered important for creating a 'culture of care' in facilities that use animals in scientific research. For example, the Brown report, which investigated alleged failures of animal care at Imperial College London, noted the physical and social separation between animal technicians and scientists as a problem that delimited a culture of care. This paper seeks to better understand the communicative relationships between scientists and animal technicians in this context. We conducted a survey of scientists working in the UK who use animals in their research (n = 230), asking who they spoke with about various aspects related to using animals in research. We found that scientists communicated with technicians about operational issues, while they spoke with other scientists about experimental design as well as moral questions and concerns. We probe the meaning of these communicative relationships using narrative analysis of semi-structured, qualitative interviews conducted with consenting survey respondents (n = 14). Analytically, this paper seeks to bridge social network analysis with geographies of care through a shared concern with relations of power.Patrones comunicativos y redes sociales entre científicos y técnicos en una cultura del cuidado: discutiendo la moralidad a través de una jerarquía de espacios ocupacionales RESUMEN La comunicación entre científicos y técnicos en animales se considera importante para crear una 'cultura del cuidado' en las instalaciones que utilizan animales en la investigación científica. Por ejemplo, el informe Brown, que investigó supuestos fallos en el cuidado de los animales en el Imperial College de Londres, señaló la separación física y social entre técnicos animales y científicos como un problema que delimitaba una cultura del cuidado. Este artículo busca comprender mejor las relaciones comunicativas entre científicos y técnicos en animales en este contexto. Realizamos ARTICLE HISTORY

6 Culturing care in animal research

“…35 This emphasis on communication is also noted by Natalie Nuyts and Carrie Friese, whose research showed how the ways in which scientists and animal technologists communicate 'shapes if and how a culture of care takes shape within the organizations and institution of science'. 36 Broadly, across much of the documentation on the topic is a sense that a culture of care needs to strive to go beyond complying with regulation. Robinson and fellow members of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations' Research and Animal Welfare Group explicitly assert that:…”

Geographies of science and technology III: Careful entanglements, responsible futures

“…Donald’s work forms part of a recent growth in interest within geography and STS in the performativity and liveliness of the ‘little tools’ (Asdal, 2008) – such as ‘guidelines and handbooks, cultures of care, and licensing practices’ (Davies et al, 2018: 615) – which govern human-human and human–non-human relationships, including in biomedical and bioscientific settings. In exploring the history and evolution of principles governing animal research in laboratories, Gail Davies and colleagues nonetheless seek to counter assertions that ‘spatial and social divisions of labor simply separate practices of caring from the epistemic practices of science’ (Davies et al, 2018: 610); rather, ethnographic work has shown how practices of science and practices of care are mutually constitutive (Bellacasa, 2017; Friese et al, 2019) and, as such, ‘animal care is a crucial part of producing a scientific fact’ (Nuyts and Friese, 2021: 17). Like Donald (2019), Davies et al (2018: 608) and the contributors to their special issue of Science, Technology and Human Values collectively explore how ‘personal capacities to care are articulated in and through complex encounters – not only with animals and infrastructures but also with an immense range of legal requirements and regulatory guidance’ – elements of scientific practice which have been largely absent from laboratory ethnographies.…”

“…Communication is also a crucial relational element of landscapes and ecologies of care (Bowlby and McKie, 2019). Nuyts and Friese (2021) use surveys, interviews and social network analysis to understand communicative behaviour within animal research institutions in the UK, with the aim of understanding how social hierarchies and power relations shape ‘cultures of care’ in laboratory settings. They find the persistence of a clear division of labour between researchers and animal technicians, with the consequence that conversations about experimental design and the morality of animal research (beyond codified ethics frameworks) happen between scientists, rather than between scientists and technicians, where conversations tend to focus on practical operational issues.…”

“…Nuyts and Friese attribute this to a hierarchical division of labour and authority between experimental and care work. But the authors also uncovered another explanation for the lack of communication: some scientists saw technicians as occupying an authoritative moral high ground in relation to animal care ethics, and scientists were thus reluctant to broach uncomfortable topics which could open themselves up to criticism and negative judgement (Nuyts and Friese, 2021). Nuyts and Friese’s work depicts animal research institutions as spaces structured by persistent social hierarchies which are reproduced through uneven patterns of communication.…”

Says Islamic Culture: From the Crisis of Logic to Religious Drinks

“…Each member of the community can give birth to something such as law, custom, belief, morals, trust, and so on which are obtained from community members. These things if done and applied continuously can be said as culture (Garcia Coll et al 2018;Nuyts and Friese 2021;Valiente-Neighbours 2020). According to Edward Burnett Tylor (Tylor 2010) culture is a complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, politics, clothing, tools, arts, morals, science, customs, and other capabilities and habits acquired by humans as members of society.…”