Event 2: The Construction of the "Environment" in Epigenetics Research: A Social Study

Flyer describing Pinel's talk

For my second event, I attended a talk presented by Clemence Pinel, entitled “The Construction of the ‘Environment’ in Epigenetics Research: A Social Study.” Pinel is a PhD student from King’s College London, studying the social science of epigenetics research. Her research focuses on the production of scientific knowledge, and explores the cultural, historical, and social contexts surrounding the process.

Prior to attending Pinel’s talk, I was intrigued by the idea of epigenetics research serving as the subject of a social study. Usually, the epigenetics research itself would be the study, so I was curious as to how one could study a scientific study from a social perspective. As a science major involved in research, I have attended talks in the past that have been similar in setting to this one, but wholly contrasting in subject material.  Being accustomed to the traditional presentation of a hypothesis supported by scientific data and analysis of that data, usually accompanied by numerous graphs, charts, and fluorescent images, it was interesting to see how a social sciences study and talk were structured.

Pinel presenting an interview excerpt during her talk

Pinel’s talk focused on how the environment of epigenetics and epigenetics research is conceived and constructed. She first introduced an ethnographic study she had done involving two labs: a lab studying breast cancer and another lab performing computational research on the microbiome. However, instead of focusing on the methods and results of their research, Pinel explored the physical and conceptual environments of the labs, including the opinions and motivations of their occupants. Rather than quantitative data, Pinel supported her points with analysis of relevant literature and excerpts from interviews she had conducted during her study. Particularly, one central idea forming the basis of her analysis was Stephen Hilgarten’s conception of knowledge production within the realm of “knowledge-control regimes” (Hilgarten). With knowledge as a form of their capital, scientists, in a sense, act as entrepreneurs in their pursuit of research, fitting with Bruno Latour’s conception of scientists as “wild capitalists” (Latour). Thus, tools such as collaborations are utilized by scientists as resources to enhance the environment of their research in the capitalist world it takes place in (Pinel). Pinel distilled this conceptualization of scientists and their research into three contributing factors: profitability, marketability, and versatility (Pinel).

I found Pinel’s work intriguing since it attempts to view and understand research from a different perspective. As a researcher myself, it was interesting to think about these underlying motivations and external factors surrounding and shaping the actual scientific work that is usually the center of my focus. Pinel’s work illustrates how an artistic perspective to science, and even something as niche as epigenetics research, can complement and enhance one’s understanding and execution of the work. All in all, I gained a new outlook on science and research, and the role creative analysis can play, by attending this talk. I would definitely recommend events like this one to my classmates as a way to broaden their perspectives on what they believe they already know, or introduce them to new ways of thought altogether!

Selfie with Pinel answering audience questions in the background

References

Hilgartner, Stephen. Reordering Life: Knowledge and Control in the Genomics Revolution. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2017.

Latour, Bruno. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1987.

Pinel, Clemence, Prainsack, Barabara, McKevitt, Christopher. “Searching for ‘Amazing Data’: Ethnography of an Epigenetic Research Laboratory.” Epigenomics of Common Diseases Conference 2016, Cambridge, UK, 2016.