Domesticating data: Traveling and value-making in the data economy.

Data are versatile objects that can travel across contexts. While data's travels have been widely discussed, little attention has been paid to the sites from where and to which data flow. Drawing upon ethnographic fieldwork in two connected data-intensive laboratories and the concept of domestication, we explore what it takes to bring data 'home' into the laboratory. As data come and dwell in the home, they are made to follow rituals, and as a result, data are reshaped and form ties with the laboratory and its practitioners. We identify four main ways of domesticating data. First, through storytelling about the data's origins, data practitioners draw the boundaries of their laboratory. Second, through standardization, staff transform samples into digital data that can travel well while ruling what data can be let into the home. Third, through formatting, data practitioners become familiar with their data and at the same time imprint the data, thus making them belong to their home. Finally, through cultivation, staff turn data into a resource for knowledge production. Through the lens of domestication, we see the data economy as a collection of homes connected by flows, and it is because data are tamed and attached to homes that they become valuable knowledge tools. Such domestication practices also have broad implications for staff, who in the process of 'homing' data, come to belong to the laboratory. To conclude, we reflect on what these domestication processes-which silence unusual behaviours in the data-mean for the knowledge produced in data-intensive research.

Slowing down decay: biological clocks in personalized medicine.

This article discusses so-called biological clocks. These technologies, based on aging biomarkers, trace and measure molecular changes in order to monitor individuals' "true" biological age against their chronological age. Drawing on the concept of decay, and building on ethnographic fieldwork in an academic laboratory and a commercial firm, we analyze the implications of the development and commercialization of biological clocks that can identify when decay is "out of tempo." We show how the building of biological clocks rests on particular forms of knowing decay: In the academic laboratory, researchers focus on endo-processes of decay that are internal to the person, but when the technology moves to the market, the focus shifts as staff bracket decay as exo-processes, which are seen as resulting from a person's lifestyle. As the technology of biological clocks travels from the laboratory to the market of online testing of the consumer's biological age, we observe shifting visions of aging: from an inevitable trajectory of decline to a malleable and plastic one. While decay is an inevitable trajectory starting at birth and ending with death, the commercialization of biological clocks points to ways of stretching time between birth and death as individuals "optimize" their biological age through lifestyle changes. Regardless of admitted uncertainties about what is measured and the connection between maintenance and future health outcomes, the aging person is made responsible for their decaying body and for enacting maintenance to slow down decay. We show how the biological clock's way of "knowing" decay turns aging and its maintenance into a life-long concern and highlight the normative implications of framing decay as malleable and in need of intervention.

Democratic research: Setting up a research commons for a qualitative, comparative, longitudinal interview study during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The sudden and dramatic advent of the COVID-19 pandemic led to urgent demands for timely, relevant, yet rigorous research. This paper discusses the origin, design, and execution of the SolPan research commons, a large-scale, international, comparative, qualitative research project that sought to respond to the need for knowledge among researchers and policymakers in times of crisis. The form of organization as a research commons is characterized by an underlying solidaristic attitude of its members and its intrinsic organizational features in which research data and knowledge in the study is shared and jointly owned. As such, the project is peer-governed, rooted in (idealist) social values of academia, and aims at providing tools and benefits for its members. In this paper, we discuss challenges and solutions for qualitative studies that seek to operate as research commons.

Renting Valuable Assets: Knowledge and Value Production in Academic Science.

This paper explores what it takes for research laboratories to produce valuable knowledge in academic institutions marked by the coexistence of multiple evaluative frameworks. Drawing upon ethnographic fieldwork carried out in two UK-based epigenetics research laboratories, I examine the set of practices through which research groups intertwine knowledge production with the making of scientific, health and wealth value. This includes building and maintaining a portfolio of valuable resources, such as expertise, scientific credibility or data and turning these resources into assets by carefully organising and managing their value. Laboratories then put these assets to productive use within and outside their labs towards the creation or extraction of value. I identify two models for producing value within academic science: a commodity-based model whereby laboratories mobilise their assets to produce results, which can be converted into publications for the accumulation of credibility capital; and a rentier model of accumulation, whereby laboratories own valuable assets, which they rent out to others outside their lab against a revenue. Following recent developments in STS on value production in the bioeconomy, I argue that the concepts of asset and rent are essential analytical tools to get to grips with the origins of value within academic science.

When more data means better results: Abundance and scarcity in research collaborations in epigenetics.

Drawing upon ethnographic findings from an epigenetics research laboratory in the United Kingdom, this paper explores practices of research collaborations in the field of epigenetics, and epigenomics research consortia in particular. I demonstrate that research consortia are key scientific infrastructures that enable the aggregation of masses of data deemed necessary for the production of results and the fostering of epistemic value. Building on STS scholarship on value production, and the concept of asset, I show that the production of valuable research within epigenomics research consortia rests on the active organisation and management of abundance and scarcity. It involves shaping and standardising the masses of data gathered in consortia, while it also entails research teams enclosing their data within their laboratories' walls. As they do so, research teams construct data into scarce and monopolised assets, which they can put to productive use in collaborative endeavours against a revenue. In addition to contributing empirical and critical insights into the ways epigenetics knowledge is formed and negotiated in specific research contexts, this paper offers conceptual tools to examine and problematise knowledge production practices in data-intensive research more broadly. In particular, it points out that while contemporary big biology is marked by the generalised imperative to 'share' data and 'open' science, collaborative endeavours within research consortia are built around forms of exclusions.

Caring for data: Value creation in a data-intensive research laboratory.

Drawing upon ethnographic observations of staff working within a research laboratory built around research and clinical data from twins, this article analyzes practices underlying the production and maintenance of a research database. While critical data studies have discussed different forms of 'data work' through which data are produced and turned into effective research resources, in this paper we foreground a specific form of data work, namely the affective and attentive relationships that humans build with data. Building on STS and feminist scholarship that highlights the importance of care in scientific work, we capture this specific form of data work as care. Treating data as relational entities, we discuss a set of caring practices that staff employ to produce and maintain their data, as well as the hierarchical and institutional arrangements within which these caring practices take place. We show that through acts of caring, that is, through affective and attentive engagements, researchers build long-term relationships with the data they help produce, and feel responsible for its flourishing and growth. At the same time, these practices of care - which we found to be gendered and valued differently from other practices within formal and informal reward systems - help to make data valuable for the institution. In this manner, care for data is an important practice of valuation and valorisation within data-intensive research that has so far received little explicit attention in scholarship and professional research practice.

Markers as mediators: A review and synthesis of epigenetics literature.

Epigenetics, the study of the processes that control gene expression without a change in DNA sequence, highlights the importance of environmental factors in gene regulation. This paper maps the terrain of epigenetics and identifies four main research subfields: gene expression; molecular epigenetics; clinical epigenetics and epigenetic epidemiology. Within and across these fields, we analyse of what is conceptualised as environment and demonstrate the variable ways authors understand epigenetics environments. Then, following an analysis of the discursive strategies employed by epigenetics researchers, we demonstrate how authors portray the interactions between genes, epigenetics, and environment as relationships linking the outside (where the environment is located) with the inside (where the genes are located). We argue that authors assign specific roles to each actor: the environment as the active player initiating the relationship, the genes as recipients, and epigenetics as mediators between environment and genes. Framed as mediators, epigenetic markers can be understood as enablers of communication between environment and genome, capable of processing and organising signals so as to regulate the interactions between the actors of epigenetic relationships. This finding complicates the observation by social science scholars that the interactions between environment and genes can be understood through the concept of signal.