Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40027175›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal for philosophy of science2025

Conceptualising research environments using biological niche concepts.

Rose Trappes, Sabina Leonelli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal for philosophy of science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Rose TrappesEgenis Centre for the Study of the Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Byrne House, St German's Road, Exeter, EX4 4PJ UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6398-5404
Sabina LeonelliEgenis Centre for the Study of the Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Byrne House, St German's Road, Exeter, EX4 4PJ UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7815-6609

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several philosophers of science have taken inspiration from biological research on niches to conceptualise scientific practice. We systematise and extend three niche-based theories of scientific practice: conceptual ecology, cognitive niche construction, and scientific niche construction. We argue that research niches are a promising conceptual tool for understanding complex and dynamic research environments, which helps to investigate relevant forms of agency and material and social interdependencies, while also highlighting their historical and dynamic nature. To illustrate this, we develop a six-point framework for conceptualising research niches

Indexed as

Cognitive nicheConceptual ecologyEpistemic nicheNersessian, NancyNiche constructionRouse, JosephScientific change

Identifiers

PMID40027175
PMCPMC11870986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.