This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Maranta, A. Articles by Pohl, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Reality of Experts and the Imagined Lay Person

Collegium Helveticum, ETH Zürich

Michael Guggenheim

Collegium Helveticum, ETH Zürich

Priska Gisler

Collegium Helveticum, ETH Zürich

Christian Pohl

Collegium Helveticum, ETH Zürich

This article examines the role of lay persons in the thinking and working of experts in different fields at the borders of academic knowledge production. The status of lay persons has been studied in the Public Understanding of Science (PUS) research, which has shed light on the implicit assumptions of the deficit model that experts usually apply to lay persons. This deficit model has been consistently criticized for its inadequacy. The purpose of this article is not to contribute to this critique but to focus on the conceptions of the expertise of lay persons as a necessary prerequisite of science-based recommendations in the context of application. We call such conceptions `imagined lay persons' (ILP). We argue that such conceptions fulfil a functional purpose in the interaction between different fields in knowledge societies, and that such conceptions should not be checked against some alleged essential features of lay persons. Based on four different case studies of science centres, environmental science and consultations, as well as state regulations of genetically modified organisms, the authors examine the image of these imagined lay persons and what role they play in expertise.

Key Words: implementation • knowledge society • participatory research • public understanding of science • user

Acta Sociologica, Vol. 46, No. 2, 150-165 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/0001699303046002005


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Delicado Scientific controversies in museums: notes from a semi-peripheral country Public Understanding of Science, November 1, 2009; 18(6): 759 - 767. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. R. Davies Constructing Communication: Talking to Scientists About Talking to the Public Science Communication, June 1, 2008; 29(4): 413 - 434. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Blok, M. Jensen, and P. Kaltoft Social identities and risk: expert and lay imaginations on pesticide use. Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2008; 17(2): 189 - 209. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Blok Experts on public trial: on democratizing expertise through a Danish consensus conference Public Understanding of Science, April 1, 2007; 16(2): 163 - 182. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Burningham, J. Barnett, A. Carr, R. Clift, and W. Wehrmeyer Industrial constructions of publics and public knowledge: a qualitative investigation of practice in the UK chemicals industry Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2007; 16(1): 23 - 43. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Stilgoe The (co-)production of public uncertainty: UK scientific advice on mobile phone health risks. Public Understanding of Science, January 1, 2007; 16(1): 45 - 61. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Thorlindsson and R. Vilhjalmsson Introduction to the Special Issue: Science, Knowledge and Society Acta Sociologica, June 1, 2003; 46(2): 99 - 105. [Abstract] [PDF]