Domesticating models: On the contingency of Covid-19 modelling in UK media and policy.

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Social Studies of Science Pub Date : 2023-02-01 Epub Date: 2022-10-13 DOI:10.1177/03063127221126166
Lukas Engelmann, Catherine M Montgomery, Steve Sturdy, Cristina Moreno Lozano
{"title":"Domesticating models: On the contingency of Covid-19 modelling in UK media and policy.","authors":"Lukas Engelmann, Catherine M Montgomery, Steve Sturdy, Cristina Moreno Lozano","doi":"10.1177/03063127221126166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our article traces the representation of pandemic modelling in UK print media from the emergence of Covid-19 to the early stages of implementing the first UK-wide lockdown in late March 2020. Covid modelling, it is widely assumed, has shaped policy decisions and public responses to the pandemic in unprecedented ways. We analyse how the UK print media has configured modelling as a significant evidence tool in the representation of the pandemic. Interrogating assumptions about infectious disease modelling, we ask why models became the trusted tool of choice for knowing and responding to the Covid pandemic in the UK. Our analysis has yielded four different periods in the evolution of intersecting policy and media frames. Initially, modellers, policymakers and media alike emphasized uncertainty about available data, and hence the speculative character of modelled projections, thus justifying a 'wait and see' approach to government intervention. With growing public pressure for government action, policy and media frames were adjusted to emphasize the importance of timing interventions for best effect, with modelling evidence mobilized to justify inaction. This gave way to a period of crisis, as the press increasingly questioned the reliability of the existing models and policies, leading modellers and policy makers to dramatically revise their projections. Finally, with the imposition of the first UK lockdown, policy and media frames were brought back into alignment with one another, in a process of domestication through which the language of modelling became a basic resource for the discussion of the epidemic. Our epistemological microhistory thus challenges general accounts of the impacts of pandemic modelling and instead emphasizes contingency and interpretative flexibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":51152,"journal":{"name":"Social Studies of Science","volume":"53 1","pages":"121-145"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9892880/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Studies of Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221126166","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/10/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our article traces the representation of pandemic modelling in UK print media from the emergence of Covid-19 to the early stages of implementing the first UK-wide lockdown in late March 2020. Covid modelling, it is widely assumed, has shaped policy decisions and public responses to the pandemic in unprecedented ways. We analyse how the UK print media has configured modelling as a significant evidence tool in the representation of the pandemic. Interrogating assumptions about infectious disease modelling, we ask why models became the trusted tool of choice for knowing and responding to the Covid pandemic in the UK. Our analysis has yielded four different periods in the evolution of intersecting policy and media frames. Initially, modellers, policymakers and media alike emphasized uncertainty about available data, and hence the speculative character of modelled projections, thus justifying a 'wait and see' approach to government intervention. With growing public pressure for government action, policy and media frames were adjusted to emphasize the importance of timing interventions for best effect, with modelling evidence mobilized to justify inaction. This gave way to a period of crisis, as the press increasingly questioned the reliability of the existing models and policies, leading modellers and policy makers to dramatically revise their projections. Finally, with the imposition of the first UK lockdown, policy and media frames were brought back into alignment with one another, in a process of domestication through which the language of modelling became a basic resource for the discussion of the epidemic. Our epistemological microhistory thus challenges general accounts of the impacts of pandemic modelling and instead emphasizes contingency and interpretative flexibility.

Abstract Image

国内模型:关于新冠肺炎模型在英国媒体和政策中的偶然性。
我们的文章追溯了从新冠肺炎的出现到2020年3月底实施第一次全英国封锁的早期阶段,英国印刷媒体对大流行建模的表现。人们普遍认为,新冠肺炎模型以前所未有的方式塑造了政策决策和公众对疫情的反应。我们分析了英国印刷媒体如何将建模配置为代表疫情的重要证据工具。在质疑有关传染病模型的假设时,我们问为什么模型成为了解和应对英国新冠肺炎疫情的可信工具。我们的分析得出了交叉政策和媒体框架演变的四个不同时期。最初,建模者、决策者和媒体都强调了可用数据的不确定性,因此也强调了建模预测的投机性,从而证明了政府干预的“观望”方法是合理的。随着公众要求政府采取行动的压力越来越大,政策和媒体框架进行了调整,以强调时机干预的重要性,从而达到最佳效果,并动员模型证据来证明不作为的合理性。这让位于一段危机时期,因为媒体越来越多地质疑现有模型和政策的可靠性,导致建模者和决策者大幅修改了他们的预测。最后,随着英国第一次实施封锁,政策和媒体框架在本土化过程中重新统一,建模语言成为讨论疫情的基本资源。因此,我们的认识论微观历史挑战了对大流行建模影响的一般描述,转而强调偶然性和解释灵活性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Social Studies of Science
Social Studies of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Social Studies of Science is an international peer reviewed journal that encourages submissions of original research on science, technology and medicine. The journal is multidisciplinary, publishing work from a range of fields including: political science, sociology, economics, history, philosophy, psychology social anthropology, legal and educational disciplines. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信