Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Politics and the Life Sciences
  4. Most cited
Journal Home
Refine listing
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

Most cited

This page lists all time most cited articles for this title. Please use the publication date filters on the left if you would like to restrict this list to recently published content, for example to articles published in the last three years. The number of times each article was cited is displayed to the right of its title and can be clicked to access a list of all titles this article has been cited by.

Contents

Page 30 of 44

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • …Let No One Split Asunder: Controversy In Human Genetic Engineering

  • Stanley S. Robin, Gerald E. Markle
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 3-12

  • In 1980 the first recombinant genetic engineering experiments on humans were performed. These experiments sparked a major controversy, international in scope and potentially profound in its implications for genetic science. We develop four perspectives—substantive, network, organizational, and societal—from which science can be seen as a process having differing social implication and meaning. The research and controversy are discussed with attention to the conflicts and their resolutions from each perspective and among them. Taken together, the four perspectives are used as a single basis for understanding the social processes involved in this case study and the more general workings of science.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Birth Order and Rebelliousness: Responding to Birth Order Research Contradictions

  • Lawrence Nyman
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 163-165

  • Although I am intrigued by the recent efforts of several researchers who have taken issue with Sulloway's (1996) work on birth order, I experience some hesitancy to comment for a number of reasons. Birth order research has historically come up with contradictory findings (Nyman, 1995). In the main, I suspect that the apparent inconsistencies will be resolved not through commentary but with keener measuring tools, better experimental controls, and with the patience and energy to define each research condition so as to enable accurate replication. It is also not an easy assignment to critique the work of scientists whom I admire, especially when their inferences seem to be at odds. With this said, I shall attempt to deal with design issues inherent in birth order research in an effort to illustrate some of the factors that enter into the contradictory findings reported in the literature.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • In Defense of Enforcement of the Surrogate Contract: a Reply to Field

  • John Lawrence Hill
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 253-261

  • In deciding whether and to what extent surrogate parenting contracts should be recognized, states are faced with three legislative options. First, they may criminalize surrogacy, in effect punishing those who enter into or facilitate surrogate contracts by fine or imprisonment. Second, states may adopt the nonenforcement option. Under this approach, surrogate contracts are not subject to criminal sanction, but neither will they be enforced. The legal effect of such a rule is to leave the surrogate free to carry through with the contract or to refuse to relinquish custody of the child born of the arrangement as she wishes. In the event the surrogate decides that she wishes to keep the baby, the courts will decide the issue of parental rights in accordance with the best interests test much like that which is employed in divorce cases. This was the approach taken in In the Matter of Baby “M” (537 A.2d 1225 (N.J. 1988)). Finally, the third legislative alternative is regulation and enforcement of surrogate contracts. This would have the effect of requiring the surrogate to turn over the child she has borne for the intended parents even where she has changed her mind, a la Mary Beth Whitehead, and wishes to retain custody of the child.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Teaching Nature, to Learn from Nature

  • Alfredo Milanaccio
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 83-91

  • This article describes some aspects of an Italian didactic-pedagogic experiment about interaction between “town” pupils and natural environments. The project's general philosophy is to try to make pupils aware of our condition as “biocultural beings,” as results of biological, technological, and cultural co-evolution. The presence of extensive natural, cultural, and technological resources at the site where the experiment takes place favors such an awareness.

    Some examples of teaching techniques designed especially to introduce pupils to the difficult but necessary subject matter of co-evolution are also described. Such teaching techniques have as their main goal to make the pupils themselves able to construct a logical network of questions, rather than in teachers giving them already prepared answers.

    The as yet unresolved problems, which concern the training of teachers steeped in traditional methods, are also briefly described.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • The Place of Biopolitics in the Political Science Curriculum

  • William Kitchin
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 5-13

  • Biopolitics should be offered as a separate, independent course in the undergraduate curriculum, and graduate training should be offered within the rubric of political science. The primary reason that biopolitical materials should be covered in the undergraduate, liberal arts curriculum is that there is a need to train students to be vigilant, i.e., to have a critical capacity to confront ideas. Since so much of their lives will be intertwined with the political and so much of the political is better explained by considering biopolitical variables than by not considering them, students need exposure and academic coverage of biopolitical concepts and findings. Biopolitics represents only minor change in the general behavioralistic framework of explaining political phenomena, but represents the introduction into political science of some concepts and variables more widely used in the life sciences. Because biopolitical materials are high in quantity and because they are per se important and increase the explanatory power of traditional behavioralism, a biopolitics course belongs in the political science curriculum. The preparation of qualified teachers and researchers argues for graduate training in biopolitics. Without such graduate training in political science departments, the biopolitical inquiry will primarily be undertaken in disciplines other than political science.

  • Cited by 1
  • Cited by 1

  • Research at Stony Brook: Political Science in a Biobehavioral Laboratory∗

  • D. Calvin Andrus
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    17 May 2016, pp. 58-59

  • Political behavior, like all human behavior, can be studied using the S–O–R paradigm, where S is a particular stimulus, 0 is the human organism, and R is a response or behavior (cf. Tursky, Lodge, and Cross, 1976). Here at the Laboratory for Behavioral Research at Stony Brook we are currently conducting research projects that investigate each of these components of the paradigm and the interactions among them. Before reviewing these projects, however, I will briefly describe our laboratory facilities.

  • Cited by 1

Page 30 of 44