Competing Truths

References

• Bleier, Ruth (1984). Science and Gender: A Critique of Biology and Its Theories on Women. New York: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Conrad, Peter and Markens, Susan (2001). ‘Constructing the “Gay Gene” in the News: Optimism and Skepticism in the US and British Press.’ Health 5.3: 373–400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curtis, Ron (1994). ‘Narrative Form and Normative Force: Baconian Story-Telling in Popular Science.’ Social Studies of Science 24.3: 419–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawkins, Richard (1996). The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design. [1986]. New York and London: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Dawkins, Richard (1999). The Selfish Gene. [1976]. Oxford: Oxford UP.
   Google Scholar
• Dusek, Val (1999). ‘Sociobiology Sanitized: Evolutionary Psychology and Gene Selectionism.’ Science as Culture 8.2: 129–69.
   Google Scholar
• Eldredge, Niles (2004). Why We Do It: Rethinking Sex and the Selfish Gene. New York: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Etcoff, Nancy (1999). Survival of the Prettiest: The Science of Beauty. New York: Doubleday Books.
   Google Scholar
• Gieryn, Thomas F. (1999). Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago: The U of Chicago P.
   Google Scholar
• Gregory, Jane and Miller, Steve (1998). Science in Public: Communication, Culture, and Credibility. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hawking, Stephen (1988). A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes. London: Bantam Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hilgartner, Stephen (1990). ‘‘The Dominant View of Popularization: Conceptual Problems.’ Political Uses.’ Social Studies of Science 20.3: 519–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lancaster, Roger N. (2006). ‘Sex, Science, and Pseudoscience in the Public Sphere.’ Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power 13.1: 101–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lessl, Thomas M. (2002). ‘Gnostic Scientism and the Prohibition of Questions.’ Rhetoric and Public Affairs 5.1: 133–57.
   Google Scholar
• Lewontin, Richard, Rose, Steven and Kamin, Leon (1984). Not in Our Genes: Biology, Ideology, and Human Nature. New York: Pantheon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Luey, Beth (2010). Expanding the American Mind: Books and the Popularization of Knowledge. Amherst: U of Massachusetts P.
   Google Scholar
• Mellor, Felicity (2003). ‘Between Fact and Fiction: Demarcating Science From Non-Science in Popular Physics Books.’ Social Studies of Science 33.4: 509–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montgomery, Scott L. (1996). The Scientific Voice. New York: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Myers, Greg (2003). ‘Discourse Studies of Scientific Popularization: Questioning the Boundaries.’ Discourse Studies 5.2: 265–79.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pramling, Niklas and Säljö, Roger (2007). ‘Scientific Knowledge, Popularisation, and the Use of Metaphors: Modern Genetics in Popular Science Magazines.’ Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research 51.3: 275–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rose, Hilary and Rose, Steven, eds (2001). Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments against Evolutionary Psychology. [2000]. London: Vintage.
   Google Scholar
• Sagan, Carl (1985). Cosmos. [1980]. New York: Ballantine Books.
   Google Scholar
• Trivers, Robert (1972). ‘Parental Investment and Sexual Selection.’ Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man, 1871–1971. Ed. Bernard G. Campbell. Chicago: Aldine. 136–79.
   Google Scholar
• Turney, Jon (1999). ‘The Word and the World: Engaging With Science in Print.’ Communicating Science: Contexts and Channels. Eds Eileen Scanlon, Elizabeth Whitelegg and Simeon Yates. New York: Routledge. 120–33.
   Google Scholar
• Varghese, Susheela Abraham and Abraham, Sunita Anne (2004). ‘Book-Length Scholarly Essays as a Hybrid Genre in Science.’ Written Communication 21.2: 201–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace, Brendan (2010). Getting Darwin Wrong: Why Evolutionary Psychology Won’t Work. Exeter and Charlottesville, VA: Imprint Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Wilcox, Sarah A. (2003). ‘Cultural Context and the Conventions of Science Journalism: Drama and Contradiction in Media Coverage of Biological Ideas About Sexuality.’ Critical Studies in Media Communication 20.3: 225–47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, Edward O. (1978). On Human Nature. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, Edward O. (2000). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. [1975]. Cambridge. MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard UP.
   Google Scholar
• Žižek, Slavoj (2002). ‘Cultural Studies Versus the “Third Culture”.’ The South Atlantic Quarterly 101.1: 19–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar