Though ultimately beneficial to society, interactions between science and politics require careful tending. Because science is an exercise in trial and error, public policy development can be affected by both scientific missteps and the length of time it takes to produce reasonable scientific certainty. Introduction of scientific findings, especially more preliminary ones, into the political process has a mixed record. Understanding how these tensions play out in contemporary politics is important for both disability studies and policy studies generally. This article explores how science and scientific evidence is employed by stakeholders engaged with autism policy development in the United States.
Cite this paper
Baker, D. (2013) Use of Science in Autism Policy Development. Open Journal of Political Science, 3, 1-7. doi: 10.4236/ojps.2013.31001.
 Baker, D. (2011). The politics of neurodiversity: Why public policy matters. Denver: Lynne Rienner.
 Boote, J., Baird, W., & Beecroft, C. (2010). Public involvement at the design stage of primary health research: A narrative review of case examples. Health Policy, 95, 10-23.
 Brooks, M. (2009). Thirteen things that don’t make sense: The most baffling scientific mysteries of our time. New York: Random House.
 Bumiller, K. (2009). The geneticization of autism: From new reproductive technologies to the conception of genetic normalcy. Signs, 34, 875-899. doi:10.1086/597130
 David, P. A. (2008). The historical origins of “open science”: An essay on patronage, reputation and common agency contracting in the scientific revolution. Capitalism and Society, 3.
 Driscoll, C., Lambert, K. F., Chapin III, F. S., Nowak, D., Spies, T. A., Swanson, F. J. et al. (2012). Science and society: The role of long-term studies in environmental stewardship. Bioscience, 62, 354-366. doi:10.1525/bio.2012.62.4.7
 Drolet, B. C., & Lorenzi, N. M. (2010). Translational research: Understanding the continuum from bench to bedside. Translational Research, 157, 1-5.
 Felt, U., & Fochler, M. (2008). The bottom-up meanings of the concept of public participation in science and technology. Science and Public Policy, 21, 17-35.
 Fine, M., & Asch, A. (1998). Disability beyond stigma: Social interaction, discrimination and activism. Journal of Social Issues, 44, 3-21. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1988.tb02045.x
 Grinker, R. R. (2008). Unstrange minds: Remapping the world of autism. Philadelphia, PA: Basic Books.
 Jentoft, S., & Chuenpagdee, R. (2009). Fisheries and coastal governance as a wicked problem. Marine Policy, 33, 553-560.
 Juntti, M., Duncan, R., & Turnpenny, J. (2009). Evidence, politics and power in public policy for the environment. Environmental Science & Policy, 12, 207-125. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2008.12.007
 Kenslen, H. (1951). Science and politics. The American Political Science Review, 14, 641-661.
 Kim, Y. S., Leventhal, B. L., Yun-Joo, K., Fombonne, E., Laska, E., Lim, E.-C. et al. (2011). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorders in a total population sample. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 168, 904-912. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.10101532
 Kingdon, J. (2010). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies, update edition, with an epilogue on health care (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
 Konefal, J., & Hatanaka, M. (2011). Enacting third-party certification: A case study of science and politics in organic shrimp certification. Journal of Rural Studies, 27, 125-133.
 Kuhn, T. (2012). The structure of scientific revolutions: 50th anniversary edition. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
 McIvor, D. (2010). The politics of speed: Connolly, wolin, and the prospects for democratic citizenship in an accelerated polity. Polity, 43, 58-83. doi:10.1057/pol.2010.23
 McRuer, R., & Berube, M. F. (2006). Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York: New York University Press.
 Oreskes, N. (2011). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscurred the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York: Bloomsburry Press.
 Pielke, R. A. (2007). The honest broker: Making sense of science in policy and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Pinker, S. (2011). The better angels of nature: Why violence has declined. New York: Viking Penguin.
 Roberts, N. C., & King, P. J. (1991). Policy entrepreneurs: Their activity structure and function in the policy process. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 2, 147-175.
 Silverstein, L. B., & Auerbach, C. (2003). Qualitative data. New York: NYU Press.
 Silverstein, R. (2010). Anatomy of change: The need for effective disability policy change agents. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 91, 173-177. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2009.11.002
 Skloot, R. (2011). The immortal life of henrietta lacks. New York: Crown Publishers.
 Stace, H. (2011). Moving beyond love and luck: building right relationships and respecting lived experience in New Zealand autism policy. Wellington: University of Victoria.
 Stone, D. (2001). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (revised edition). New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
 Taleb, N. N. (2007). The black swan. New York: Random House.
 Tijssen, R. J. (2010). Discarding the “basic science/applied science” dichotomy: A knowledge utilization triangle classification system of research journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61, 1842-1852. doi:10.1002/asi.21366
 Trickett, S. B., Trafton, J. G., & Schun, C. D. (2009). How do scientists respond to anomalies? Different strategies used in basic and applied science. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 711-729.