Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Scientific Nature of Social Psychology01:30

Scientific Nature of Social Psychology

Social psychology is a scientific discipline dedicated to understanding how individuals think, feel, and behave in social contexts. Unlike common sense, which relies on anecdotal experiences and intuition, social psychology employs systematic research and empirical methods to ensure objectivity and reliability. This distinction is fundamental in distinguishing scientifically supported findings from mere speculation.Four fundamental scientific values guide a structured approach to research in...
Structuralism01:26

Structuralism

Structuralism, an early psychological theory developed by Wilhelm Wundt and his student Edward Bradford Titchener, sought to dissect the human mind into its most fundamental components. Wundt's groundbreaking work in his laboratory set the stage for Titchener to define structuralism's goal as cataloging the "atoms" of the mind—sensations, images, and feelings—akin to how chemists identify elements of matter.
Titchener's approach to structuralism was unique. He employed introspection, a method...
Social Proof00:52

Social Proof

Social proof is a form of persuasion based on comparison and conformity. People compare their behavior and actions to what others are doing and will change to conform to do what their peers do.
The Scientific Method03:50

The Scientific Method

Chemistry is an empirical science. Scientists often pose questions to understand the chemistry in everyday life and seek answers to these questions. To achieve this, scientists follow a definitive series of steps that together make up the Scientific Method. This approach involves making observations, asking questions, building a hypothesis, conducting experiments, analyzing results, and forming a conclusion.
The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
The Scientific Method01:32

The Scientific Method

The scientific method is a detailed, empirical problem-solving process used by biologists and other scientists. This iterative approach involves formulating a question based on observation, developing a testable potential explanation for the observation (called a hypothesis), making and testing predictions based on the hypothesis, and using the findings to create new hypotheses and predictions.
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Neural representations of popularity and leadership status relate to conformity in daily life.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2026
Same author

Interdisciplinary college curriculum and its labor market implications.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2023
Same author

Trends in Elective Deliveries in California and New Jersey.

AJPM focus·2023
Same author

Developmental Trajectories of Autism.

Pediatrics·2023
Same author

Differential spatial-social accessibility to mental health care and suicide.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2023
Same author

Elective Deliveries and the Risk of Autism.

American journal of preventive medicine·2022

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 29, 2026

Perspectives on Neuroscience
26:41

Perspectives on Neuroscience

Published on: July 31, 2007

The Temporal Structure of Scientific Consensus Formation.

Uri Shwed1, Peter S Bearman

  • 1Ben Gurion University.

American Sociological Review
|September 3, 2011
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

This study introduces a method to track scientific consensus by analyzing citation networks. It reveals how scientific debates evolve and propositions become accepted facts over time.

More Related Videos

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
09:13

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Published on: April 22, 2015

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 29, 2026

Perspectives on Neuroscience
26:41

Perspectives on Neuroscience

Published on: July 31, 2007

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder
09:13

Testing Sensory and Multisensory Function in Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder

Published on: April 22, 2015

Area of Science:

  • Sociology of Science
  • Bibliometrics
  • Scientific Communication

Background:

  • Understanding how scientific propositions transition from debated hypotheses to accepted facts is crucial.
  • Existing methods often overlook the dynamics of scientific contestation and consensus formation.
  • Latour's black box imagery provides a framework for analyzing scientific knowledge structures.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To develop a novel strategy for evaluating the state of scientific contestation on various issues.
  • To analyze the structural changes in scientific citation networks as consensus emerges.
  • To identify distinct trajectories that scientific propositions follow towards acceptance.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of scientific citation networks using Latour's black box concept.
  • Quantitative assessment of internal divisions within networks as consensus forms.
  • Case studies including established facts (smoking carcinogenicity) and contested issues (cell phones, vaccines).

Main Results:

  • A decline in the importance of internal network divisions correlates with the formation of scientific consensus.
  • The study demonstrates a method applicable to both settled and currently debated scientific topics.
  • A typology of scientific proposition trajectories towards consensus is identified.

Conclusions:

  • Scientific consensus formation can be systematically analyzed through citation network structures.
  • This approach offers renewed sociological insights into the process of scientific knowledge acceptance.
  • The findings provide a framework for understanding the evolution of scientific facts.