Twin research, revisionism and metahistory.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Author(s): Teo T;Teo T; Ball LC
  • Source:
    History of the human sciences [Hist Human Sci] 2009 Dec; Vol. 22 (5), pp. 1-23.
  • Publication Type:
    Historical Article; Journal Article
  • Language:
    English
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Sage Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100967737 Publication Model: Print Cited Medium: Print ISSN: 0952-6951 (Print) Linking ISSN: 09526951 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Hist Human Sci
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Feb. 1992- : London : Sage
      Original Publication: [London : Routledge], 1988-
    • Subject Terms:
      Eugenics*/history ; Genetics, Behavioral*/education ; Genetics, Behavioral*/history ; Historiography* ; Research*/education ; Research*/history ; Science*/education ; Science*/history ; Twin Studies as Topic*/history; History, 19th Century ; History, 20th Century ; National Socialism/history ; Political Systems/history ; Research Personnel/education ; Research Personnel/history ; Research Personnel/psychology ; Twins/ethnology ; Twins/physiology ; Twins/psychology
    • Abstract:
      We understand metahistory as an approach that studies how histories within a particular discipline have been written and focus on insider scientists' reconstructions of twin research. Using the concept of ethical-political affordances we suggest that such histories are based on a management of resources that prove to be beneficial for representing one's own research traditions in a positive light. Instead of discussing information on the context and intellectual life of pioneers of the twin method, which include high-caliber eugenicists and Nazi ideologues, and on how the twin method has been used and abused, insider scientists' accounts present twin research as neutral, objective and void of any kind of political connotations. We show how important leaders of German twin research have been historically managed, and how their contributions have been distorted and omitted. Reasons for historical revisionism by omission and for selectively revised accounts of the past are discussed. Suggestions for writing accounts of the twin method are included and focus on the necessity of self-reflection, considerations regarding one's own ethical-political inclinations, and review of the existing historical literature. In analyzing these connections, we attempt to understand how science, politics and history interact.
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20100428 Date Completed: 20100630 Latest Revision: 20191111
    • Publication Date:
      20221213
    • Accession Number:
      10.1177/0952695109345418
    • Accession Number:
      20419900