Mandates of maternity at a science museum, from should to must
References
Davies B, Harré R. Positioning: The discursive production of selves. J Theory Soc Behav 1990; 20:20.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1990.tb00174.x
Harré R. Positioning theory. Self-Care Dependent-Care Nursing 2008; 16:28-32.
Kerr A, Cunningham-Burley ST, R. Shifting subject positions: Experts and lay people in public dialogue. Social Studies of Science 2007; 37:385-411.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312706068492
Braun K, Schultz S. “… a certain amount of engineering involved”: Constructing the public in participatory governance arrangements. Public Underst Sci 2010; 19:403-19.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509347814
ATSC. 2011 science center and museum statistics. 2014: Available from: http://www.astc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2011-Science-Center-Statistics.pdf.
Macdonald S, Silverstone R. Science on display: The representation of scientific controversy in museum exhibitions. Public Underst Sci 1992; 1:68-87.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/1/1/010
Henriksen EKF, M. . The contribution of museums to scientific literacy: Views from audience and museum professionals. Public Underst Sci 2000; 9:393-415.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/9/4/304
Bud R. Science, meaning and myth in the museum. Public Underst Sci 1995; 4:1-16.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/4/1/001
Yaneva AR, T.M., Greiner B. Staging scientific controversies: A gallery test on science museums' interactivity. Public Underst Sci 2009; 18:79-90.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507077512
Searle JR. A classification of illocutionary acts. Language and Society 1976; 5:1-23.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500006837
Searle JR. Indirect speech acts. In: Cole P, Morgan JL, editors. Syntax and semantics volume 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press; 1975. p. 59-82.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368811_004
Beattie A. Knowledge and control in health promotion: A test case for social policy and social theory. In: Gabe J, Calnan M, Bury M, editors. The sociology of the health service. London: Routledge; 1991. p. 162-202.
Weare K. The contribution of education to health promotion. In: Bunton R, Macdonald G, editors. Health promotion: Disciplines, diversity and developments. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge; 1992. p. 102-25.
Lupton D. The imperative of health: Public health and the regulated body. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications; 1995
Nutbeam D. Health literacy as a public health goal: A challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21st century. Health Promot Int 2000; 15:259-67.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/15.3.259
Tulchinsky TH, Varavikova E, Bickford JD. The new public health. Third ed. Cambridge: Academic Press; 2014
Petersen AR, Lupton D. The new public health: Health and self in the age of risk. St. Leonards, NSW Australia: Allen & Unwin; 1996
Hooper-Greenhill E. The educational role of the museum. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge; 1999
Leinhardt G, Knutson K. Listening in on museum conversations. Walnut Creek: Altamira Press; 2004
Danilov VJ. Science and technology centers. Cambridge: MIT Press; 1982
Agar M. The professional stranger: An informal introduction to ethnography. New York: Academic Press; 1980
Spradley JP. The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston; 1979
Atkinson P. Handbook of ethnography. London: SAGE; 2001
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608337
Bezemer J, Jewitt C. Multimodal analysis: Key issues (pre-print version). In: Litosseliti L, editor. Research methods in linguistics. London: Continuum; 2010. p. 180-97.
Kress G. Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication Abringdon, UK: Routledge; 2010
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203970034
Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company; 1967
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014
Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2006
Corbin JM, Strauss AL. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 3rd ed. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2008
DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230153
Lindlof TR, Taylor BC. Qualitative communication research methods. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 2011
De Borhegyi S. Visual communication in the science museum. Curator 1963; 6:45-57.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1963.tb01331.x
Cameron D. A viewpoint: The museum as a communications sytem and implications for museum education. Curator 1968; 11:33-40.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2151-6952.1968.tb00883.x
Hooper-Greenhill E. A new communication model for museums. Curator 1991; 6:45-57.
Searle JR. Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. London: Cambridge University Press; 1969
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438
Hymes DH. Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1974
Frentz TS, Farrell TB. Language-action: A paradigm for communication. Q J Speech 1976; 62:333-49.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335637609383348
Van Dijk TA. Pragmatic connectives. J Prag 1979; 3:447-56.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90019-5
Wunderlich D. Methodological remarks on speech act theory. Searle JR, Kiefer F, Bierwisch M, editors. Amsterdam: Springer; 1980.291-312
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8964-1_14
Cooren F. The contribution of speech act theory to the analysis of conversation. In: Fitch KL, Sanders RE, editors. The handbook of language and social interaction. New York: Psychology Press; 2005. p. 21-40.
Toulmin S. The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1958
Goffman E. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1974
Tannen D. Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University Press; 1993
Hom AG, Plaza RM, Palmén R. The framing of risk and implications for policy and governance: The case of emf. Public Underst Sci 2011; 20:319-33.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509336712
Steier F, Jorgenson J. Ethics and aesthetics of observing frames. Cybernetics and Human Knowing 2003; 10:pp. 124-36.
Benveniste E. Problems in general linguistics. Coral Gables: University of Miami Press; 1971
Morgan LM. The rise and demise of a collection of human fetuses at mount holyoke college. Perspect Biol Med 2006; 49:435-51.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/pbm.2006.0043
NIDA. Dramatic increases in maternal opioid use and neonatal abstinence syndrome. Bethesda: National Institute of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse; 2015 [cited 2017]; Available from: https://www.drugabuse.gov/related-topics/trends-statistics/infographics/dramatic-increases-in-maternal-opioid-use-neonatal-abstinence-syndrome.
WHO. Preterm birth fact sheet: World health organization. Regional office for europe. Geneva2013 [cited 2013 03/06/2013]; Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs363/en/index.html.
Stieb DM, Chen L, Eshoul M, et al. Ambient air pollution, birth weight and preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Res 2012; 117:100-11.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2012.05.007
Darrow LA, Klein M, Flanders WD, et al. Ambient air pollution and preterm birth: A time-series analysis. Epidemiology 2009; 20:689-98.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181a7128f
Torres-Sanchez LE, Berkowitz G, Lopez-Carrillo L, et al. Intrauterine lead exposure and preterm birth. Environ Res 1999; 81:297-301.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/enrs.1999.3984
Fei C, McLaughlin JK, Tarone RE, et al. Fetal growth indicators and perfluorinated chemicals: A study in the danish national birth cohort. Am J Epidemiol 2008; 168:66-72.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn095
Gottlieb P. The practical syllogism. In: Kraut R, editor. The blackwell guide to aristotle's nicomachean ethics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2006.
Eckholm E. Specialists join call for veto of drug bill. New York Times. 2014 04/15/14.
Wilson M. ‘Bodies’ exhibitors admit corpse origins are murky. New York Times. 2008 05/30/2008.
Layne LL. Motherhood lost: A feminist account of pregnancy loss in america. New York: Routledge; 2003
Ehninger D. Towards a taxonomy of prescriptive discourse. In: White EE, editor. Rhetoric in transition: Studies in the nature and uses of rhetoric. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press; 1980. p. 89-100.
Fitch KL. A cross cultural study of directive sequences and some implications for compliance gaining research. ComM 1994; 61:185-209.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759409376333
Labov WF, D. Therapeutic discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. New York, NY: Academic Press; 1977
Oaks L. Smoking and pregnancy: The politics of fetal protection. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press; 2001
Pea R. The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. J Learn Sci 2004; 13:423-51.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_6
Puntambekar S, Hübscher R. Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educ Psychol 2005; 40:1-12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1
Hovland CI, editor. The order of presentation in persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 1957.
Goffman E. "Footing". Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1981. p. 124-59.
Shen L. Antecedents to psychological reactance: The impact of threat, message frame, and choice. Health Commun 2014; 30:975-85.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2014.910882
Richards AS, Banas JA, Magid Y. More on inoculating against reactance to persuasive health messages: The paradox of threat. Health Commun 2016:1-13.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1196410
Xu J. The impact of locus of control and controlling language on psychological reactance and ad effectiveness in health communication. Health Commun 2016:1-9.
Kasperson RE, Kasperson JX. The social amplification and attenuation of risk. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 1996; 545:95-105.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716296545001010
Schütz H, Wiedemann PM. Framing effects on risk perception of nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 2008; 17:369-79.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506071282
Goodman JR, Goodman BP. Beneficial or biohazard? How the media frame biosolids. Public Underst Sci 2006; 15:359-75.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506062468
How to Cite
Lee, David Haldane. 2017. “Mandates of Maternity at a Science Museum, from Should to Must”. Qualitative Research in Medicine and Healthcare 1 (3). https://doi.org/10.4081/qrmh.2017.6791.
PAGEPress has chosen to apply the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0) to all manuscripts to be published.