• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
• Publications close
• Research data close
• Other research products close
• EU close
• Edinburgh Research Explorer close
• OpenAIRE close

AbstractThis special issue looks at some of the ways that images are adopted, co‐opted, and adapted in the life sciences and beyond. It brings together papers that investigate the role of visualization in scientific knowledge‐production with contributions that focus on the distribution and dissemination of knowledge to a broader audience. A commentary provides a critical perspective. In this editorial we introduce circulation as a practice to better understand scientific images. Along two themes, we highlight connections across the papers. First, the social life of scientific representation follows the contexts, settings, and spaces through which images circulate. Second, authorship, expertise, and trust inform the capacity and the failure of images to circulate. Altogether, this volume raises a set of new questions about circulation as practice in the historiography of images in the life sciences.

This article examines how Pope Innocent III (1198–1216) and his curia used emotions to communicate the supreme authority of the pope through a gendered order of knowledge and feeling in letters. Innocent and his curia worked codes of masculinity into an emotional regime of excellence and spiritual possibility, one that excluded women and femininity and enabled the derogation of feminised forms of spiritual authority. Focusing on Innocent and his curia's use of sorrowful emotions, it traces how Innocent interpreted emotions evoked by earthly frustrations as feminine, and a threat to papal primacy and the authority of the exclusively male, clerical hierarchy on which it stood. Understanding how the pope did so helps us to make sense of how he guarded the papal office as the exclusive preserve of men, as well as how the practice of emotion shaped the communication of hegemonic masculine power in the Middle Ages.

BackgroundMany European Health Systems are implementing or increasing levels of cost-sharing for medicine in response to the growing constrains on public spending on health despite their negative impact on population health due to delay in seeking care.ObjectiveThis study aims to examine the relationships between multimorbidity (two or more coexisting chronic diseases, CDs), complex multimorbidity (three or more CDs impacting at least three different body systems), and out-of-pocket expenditure (OOPE) for medicine across European nations.MethodsThis study utilized data on participants aged 50 years and above from two recent waves of the Survey of Health, Aging, and Retirement in Europe conducted in 2013 (n = 55,806) and 2015 (n = 51,237). Pooled cross-sectional and longitudinal study designs were used, as well as a two-part model, to analyse the association between multimorbidity and OOPE for medicine.ResultsThe prevalence of multimorbidity was 50.4% in 2013 and 48.2% in 2015. Nearly half of those with multimorbidity had complex multimorbidity. Each additional CD was associated with a 34% greater likelihood of incurring any OOPE for medicine (Odds ratio = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.31–1.36). The average incremental OOPE for medicine was 26.4 euros for each additional CD (95% CI = 25.1–27·7), and 32.1 euros for each additional body system affected (95% CI 30.6–33.7). In stratified analyses for country-specific quartiles of household income the average incremental OOPE for medicine was not significantly different across groups.ConclusionBetween 2013 and 2015 in 13 European Health Systems increased prevalence of CDs was associated with greater likelihood of having OOPE on medication and an increase in the average amount spent when one occurred. Monitoring this indicator is important considering the negative association with treatment adherence and subsequent effects on health.

From page 2 to page 6. This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 892230. The PI is Francesca Saggini. See CORDIS website at https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/892230

Abstract. The detection and attribution (D&A) of paleoclimatic change to external radiative forcing relies on regression of statistical reconstructions on simulations. However, this procedure may be biased by assumptions of stationarity and univariate linear response of the underlying paleoclimatic observations. Here we perform a D&A study, modeling paleoclimate data observations as a function of paleoclimatic data simulations. Specifically, we detect and attribute tree-ring width (TRW) observations as a linear function of TRW simulations, which are themselves a nonlinear and multivariate TRW simulation driven with singly forced and cumulatively forced climate simulations for the period 1401–2000 CE. Temperature- and moisture-sensitive TRW simulations detect distinct patterns in time and space. Temperature-sensitive TRW observations and simulations are significantly correlated for Northern Hemisphere averages, and their variation is attributed to volcanic forcing. In decadally smoothed temporal fingerprints, we find the observed responses to be significantly larger and/or more persistent than the simulated responses. The pattern of simulated TRW of moisture-limited trees is consistent with the observed anomalies in the 2 years following major volcanic eruptions. We can for the first time attribute this spatiotemporal fingerprint in moisture-limited tree-ring records to volcanic forcing. These results suggest that the use of nonlinear and multivariate proxy system models in paleoclimatic detection and attribution studies may permit more realistic, spatially resolved and multivariate fingerprint detection studies and evaluation of the climate sensitivity to external radiative forcing than has previously been possible.

AbstractBiologists who work on the pig (Sus scrofa) take advantage of its similarity to humans by constructing the inferential and material means to traffic data, information and knowledge across the species barrier. Their research has been funded due to its perceived value for agriculture and medicine. Improving selective breeding practices, for instance, has been a driver of genomics research. The pig is also an animal model for biomedical research and practice, and is proposed as a source of organs for cross-species transplantation: xenotransplantation. Genomics research has informed transplantation biology, which has itself motivated developments in genomics. Both have generated models of correspondences between the genomes of pigs and humans. Concerning genomics, I detail how researchers traverse species boundaries to develop representations of the pig genome, alongside ensuring that such representations are sufficiently porcine. In transplantation biology, the representations of the genomes of humans and pigs are used to detect and investigate immunologically-pertinent differences between the two species. These key differences can then be removed, to ‘humanise’ donor pigs so that they can become a safe and effective source of organs. In both of these endeavours, there is a tension between practices that ‘humanise’ the pig (or representations thereof) through using resources from human genomics, and the need to ‘dehumanise’ the pig to maintain distinctions for legal, ethical and scientific reasons. This paper assesses the ways in which this tension has been managed, observing the differences between its realisations across comparative pig genomics and transplantation biology, and considering the consequences of this.

This article brings to bear findings from the debate on the boundary problem in democratic theory on discussions of workplace democracy to argue that workplace democrats’ focus on workers is unjustified and that more constituencies will have to be included in any prospective scheme of workplace democracy. It thereby provides a valuable and underdiscussed perspective on workplace democracy that goes beyond the debate’s usual focus on the clarification and justification of workplace democrats’ core claim. It also goes beyond approaches like stakeholder theory in law and economics that determine decision-making rights without taking into account genuinely democratic considerations. My discussion proceeds by considering three principles for inclusion from democratic theory for the specific case of the corporation. I submit that two of them, the all-coerced and the all-subjected principle, are not appropriate for this specific case, because they cannot capture the distinguishing features of the corporation. The all-affected principle however is appropriate but has a very wide range. I further argue that this is not as big of a problem as it first might seem and that this principle is still the most appropriate for defining the demos of the democratic corporation. The article closes by pointing out the consequences of this result for the workplace democracy debate and for the legitimacy of the market as a coordination mechanism.