Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42268454›Full record

ArticleHistory and philosophy of the life sciences2026

Narratives of contingency as historical evidence for philosophical arguments of contingency: pathway decisions in the early development of molecular genetics.

Wessel de Cock

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in History and philosophy of the life sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Wessel de CockHumboldt University in Berlin, Berlin, Germany. Wessel.194@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6827-8354

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article argues that philosophical arguments of contingency in the development of science can be advanced by starting from historical evidence produced through the framework of narratives of contingency. Narratives of contingency are conceptualized both as prospective narratives constructed by historical actors to navigate decisions at what they perceived as fork moments in the present and as an analytical framework for systematically reconstructing such decision-making processes from historical sources.The argument is developed in three steps. First, the article outlines three constraints that historical case studies must explicitly address in order to function as evidence for philosophical arguments of contingency and alternative pathway possibility. These are the identification of a juncture moment in a situated trajectory, an explanatory factor linking actors' decisions to the initiation of path-dependent sequences, and an explicit specification of analytical level and scale. Second, narratives of contingency are introduced as a historical framework that enables the systematic description and explanation of pathway decision-making processes, particularly in contexts of institutional deliberation where alternative courses of action were explicitly articulated. Third, the framework is illustrated through a case study of institutional decision-making in the early development of molecular genetics in Germany (1958-1960).

Indexed as

Decision MakingMolecular BiologyPhilosophyGermanyHistory, 20th CenturyNarrationContingency / Inevitability debateDevelopment of scienceHPSMolecular biologyNarratives of contingency

Identifiers

PMID42268454
PMCPMC13253592

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.