skip to main content

Society for Social Studies of Science

The STS Profession



Calls for Papers


Fellowships & Postdocs

Submitting items to 4S and Technoscience Updates

Please email items for the 4S “Profession” pages and the Technoscience Updates newsletter to .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Items may be edited for length. Please include a URL for the complete and authoritative information.

The monthly deadline for inclusion in the newsletter is the 7th.

Calls for Papers

Find here non-event related calls for papers, such as special issue journals.

Genetic Genealogy

Deadline: August 01 2017

Updated: August 11 2017

Special issue of the online journal Genealogy

Deadline for expressions of interest: 1 August 2017
Deadline for submission of papers: 1 October 2017

It is now nearly two decades since genetic tests for information about ‘deep ancestry’ or to aid in genealogical research first came on the market in the United Kingdom and the United States. The numbers and locations of companies offering these tests has multiplied hugely since and the possibility of knowing something about ancestry through a genetic test has become embedded within public culture through media coverage of personal and collective stories of tests and results.

This special issue of Genealogy ‘Genetic Genealogy’ invites contributors to critically explore what is known as direct-to-consumer ancestry testing, genetic genealogy, or recreational genetics. Building on recent work on the nature and implications of these tests, the aim of this special issue is to extend critical engagements with the claims and limits of the tests themselves; document and analysis the emergence and development of this sector; and to address its impact and effects from the perspective of those who have undertaken these tests. Some potential areas of focus may include the following:

• the history and geography of the development of this sector; the relationship between commercial ventures and scientific research units and the role of key individuals and collaborations; its political economies and degree of regulation
• further analysis of the scientific basis of the tests and what they can and cannot say about ancestry and origins
• the ways in which genetic genealogy companies deal with categories of difference such as race, ethnicity, national identity
• the figuring of gender in relation to ideas of lineage and ancestry
• the experience of genetic genealogy for individuals, families and groups in terms of senses of identity, relatedness and belonging
• and the interpersonal and familial ethics and effects of instigating and producing this form of genealogical knowledge
• the incorporation of, or resistance to, genetic genealogy in collective histories and identities
• the relationship between conventional and genetic sources of historical knowledge in family history and issues of expertise and authority
• the degree to which genetic ancestry testing features in museums, public historical narratives and historical scholarship
• the nature, use and implications of genetic genealogy in different geographical contexts especially beyond the UK and US.
• the relationship between genetic genealogy and wider uses genomic determinations of ancestry and origin in other domains including forensic genomics and biometric immigration controls.

The deadline for papers of 5-8k words is 1 October 2017 but those interested in contributing are invited to contact the Catherine Nash ( who is the guest editor for the special issue by 1 August 2017.

CFP: Science Studies and the Blue Humanities.

Deadline: February 01 2018

Updated: August 11 2017

Configurations, the journal of SLSA (The Society for Literature, Science, and the Arts) is seeking submissions for a special issue on Science Studies and the Blue Humanities, edited by Stacy Alaimo.

We are interested in essays, position papers, provocations, and artist statements that explore the significance of science studies for the development of the blue humanities. As oceans and bodies of fresh water increasingly become sites for environmentally-oriented arts and humanities scholarship, how can the emerging blue humanities best engage with the theories, questions, paradigms, and methods of science studies? How do questions of scale, temporality, materiality, and mediation emerge in aquatic zones and modes? How can literature, art, data visualization, and digital media best respond to the rapidly developing sciences of ocean acidification and climate change as well as the less publicized concerns such as the effect of military sonar on cetaceans? Work on postcolonial/decolonial science studies, Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), indigenous sciences, and citizen science especially welcome.

Please submit 5,000-7,000 word essays; 3,000 word position papers or provocations; or 2,000 word artist statements (with one or two illustrations or a link to a digital work); to Stacy Alaimo,, by February 1, 2018, for consideration. All essays will be peer-reviewed, following the standard editorial procedures of Configurations.

”Data work in healthcare” Special issue of Health Informatics Journal

Deadline: October 01 2017

Updated: July 09 2017

Full paper deadline: November 1st

Working with data has become increasingly become part of many healthcare professionals job and of patient-citizens’ life, and data work requires more time, new competences and skills, and leads to new functions and roles. A common phrase upon data and healthcare goes *“**Healthcare is data rich,* yet information poor”. There is a huge amount of healthcare data, but it is inherently difficult to use for analyses of healthcare processes and outcomes be it regarding patients, treatments, resources, or efficiency. The challenge of turning data into information – that is making sense of data – has increased with the digitization of healthcare that has occurred within the last decade through, for example, electronic patient records (EHR) and more recently patient reported outcome measures (PROM). The amount of data available is grown hugely, and at the same time going digital has made the accumulation, visualization and analysis of data easier. More and more different kinds of data work have emerged, and this special issue aims to put into the focus the opportunities and challenges connection with the subsequent redistribution of work, time, resources, authority, and power that follow suit.

*What is data work?* ‘Data work’ has quite never been defined in the specialist literature, and remains a slippery notion. We see it as a coinage after the word ‘paper work’, of which it represents an abstraction, with respect to the medium of data representation; but also an extension, with respect to what people manage as data of their interest (besides accounting and resource management). As such, data work is not only "working on data", typically producing new data in accounting for and recording a faithful representation of the work done and the involved phenomena at hand; but also that portion of work whose execution, articulation and appraisal deeply and intensively rely on data, i.e., "working by data". These two kinds of work are usually so deeply intertwined that distinguishing between them is useless and probably wrong: in the healthcare domain, the studies by Berg (Berg 1999), for instance, clearly show that clinicians record data on the patient record not only to accumulate data for archival reasons (and for many other secondary uses), but also to coordinate with each other, articulate the resources around a medical case, and take informed decision in a written, distributed communication with themselves and the other colleagues taking care of the same patient. In healthcare, data work regards the additional effort paid by caregivers in making the record a “working record” (Fitzpatrick 2004), that is a resource capable of keeping disparate competencies and roles bound together and connected around the same cases over time and space.

However, the concept of ‘data work’ can facilitate descriptions and analysis of activities and tasks connected with generating, cooking, transforming, representing, comprehending, ect. in order to bring forward the new skills and competences demanded by healthcare professionals and patient-citizens alike, as well as the shifts in resources, authority, and power that this enables and entails. As such, data work can serve as an analytical lens to make visible these kinds of efforts or work, much in the same way that Strauss proposed the concepts of ‘articulation work’ and ‘machine work’ to make visible the efforts of aligning and coordinating tasks and work, or the efforts of assembling, adjusting, and connecting machines and patients in healthcare (Strauss et al. 1985). *Digitization of healthcare and the generation of data* The emergence of large-scale information infrastructures in healthcare (IIHI has enabled the use of health data for a range of new purposes related to data-driven management, accountability, and performance resource management as well as providing a new source and foundation for healthcare and medical research data.

For example, EHRs are increasingly expected to become ‘meaningful audit tools’ by general practitioners (Winthereik et al. 2007). Expectations are developing for the types and depth of biomedical and organizational research that can be using second order data from these systems. Hence, healthcare data are expected to support inquiries such as: What drugs work best for which subgroup of patients with a certain diagnosis? How can operating rooms most optimally be staffed and used? How can IIHs be used as a foundation for data-driven management? The proliferation of tools and consulting services that promise to make healthcare organizations “data-driven”, are rapidly shifting the organization and management of healthcare practice, and the socio-technical setup is reconfigured, from in situ, socially negotiated practice to seemingly objective, rational, and scientific logics on an institutional scale. Hence, there is a pressing need to explore how healthcare data and data-driven management contributes to this reconfiguration. How is the role of medical professions changing? How is the nature of the professional expertise changing, and what are the implications for the autonomy and discretion long enjoyed by clinicians? Along similar lines, external actors such as the general public, accreditation, and state authorities increasingly demand that healthcare organizations become more transparent and accountable by providing data through performances measures (Pine and Mazmanian 2014). This is spurred by a demand to see that healthcare organizations deliver services of high quality and according to the best healthcare standards (Christensen and Ellingsen, 2014) while using funding and resources most efficiently. Healthcare organizations and individual clinicians are evaluated according to metrics that assess care delivery, such as: Are patients diagnosed with cancer treated within the stipulated time? Which ward or hospital is most cost- and resource-effective? Amidst these high stakes come concerns about the situated practices of making, managing, and using data. The creation, maintenance, aggregation, transport, and re-purposing of data does not happen without work effort to collect and transform data.

‘Raw Data is an Oxymoron’, a bad idea and should be cooked with care, as Bowker succinctly stated (Bowker 2005). With the emergence of IIH and the increasing demand for data-driven management, accountability and increased performance, the importance and character of working with, by and upon data increases. Themes for the special issue Topics relevant for this special issue include, but are not limited to, the following: · *The new work of healthcare data*: What are the new competences, tasks, and functions that the emergence of data-driven healthcare entails? How are existing occupations and professions changing in the wake of the push for data-driven healthcare? · *The new ‘data work’ of patients: *What does it involve to be enrolled or engaged in the generation, distribution, understanding of data on one’s health, and have such data come back to you filtered and interpreted by other parties that base interventions for you on those data? · *The politics of creating and using healthcare data*: How do categories, classifications and algorithms shape what counts as data, and what do these schemes make visible and invisible? ·

*Artefacts and infrastructures as knowledge production*: Artefacts enter and shape the processes of knowledge production according to their own characteristics and entail their own epistemological implications and shape knowledge forms. · *Reflection, management and accountability*: What instances of reflection, management and accountability are created with specific healthcare IT systems? What are the challenges, conflicts, and opportunities? · *Systems design: *How do the agendas of data for accountability and secondary uses influence and become integrated into systems design and development? Is this a simple add-on, or a dominant concern? What is the role of health informatics research?

*Important dates:* Important dates: Abstract October 1st; Full paper November 1st; 1st Notification January 15th; revised submissions March 15th; Final notification April 15th; Camera-ready papers May 1st.

Publication: Mid-2018 *Manuscript Format:* Please check the website for guidelines upon formatting of your manuscript ( submission-guidelines). Your manuscript should be between 3000 and 4000 words long (excl. references). Please also supply an abstract of 100-150 words, and up to five keywords, arranged in alphabetical order. Mark your submission “Special issue on Data work in healthcare” in the manuscript header as well as in the submission letter.

Technologies of Frankenstein

March 07 2018 to March 09 2018 | Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ, USA

Deadline: October 19 2017

Updated: June 08 2017

The 200th anniversary year of the first edition of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: Or, The Modern Prometheus has drawn worldwide interest in revisiting the novel’s themes. What were those themes and what is their value to us in the early twenty-first century? Mary Shelley was rather vague as to how Victor, a young medical student, managed to reanimate a person cobbled together from parts of corpses. Partly as a result of this technical gap, and partly as a result of many other features of the novel, Frankenstein continues to inspire discourse in scholarly, popular, and creative culture about the Monstrous, the Outsider, the Other, and scientific ethics. This conference will examine such connections in our thinking about humanism and techno-science from the novel’s publication to the present. We construe broadly the intersecting themes of humanism, technology, and science and we welcome proposals from all fields of study for presentations that add a twenty-first century perspective to Frankenstein. Topic areas may include but are not limited to:

 Artificial Intelligence and Robotics

 Branding “Frankenstein” (Food, Comics, Gaming, Music, Theater, Film)

 Computational and Naval Technology (Mapping, Navigation, The Idea of the Journey)

 Digital Humanities and GeoHumanities (Applications, Pedagogy, Library/Information


 Engineering Technologies: Past/Present/Future (Chemical, Electrical, Biomedical)

 Future Technologies and Labor Concerns

Submit abstracts of 300 words and brief CV by 15 October 2017 to Michael Geselowitz ( and Robin Hammerman (