Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42327377›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in sociology2026

Toward a paradox-oriented paradigm of knowing: the form theory of observation and quality in empirical sciences.

Mario S Staller, Swen Koerner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in sociology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Caring About Care: The Paradox of Self-Care in Occupational Therapy.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association
    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.

Mario S StallerDepartment of Police, University for Police and Public Administration North Rhine-Westphalia, Cologne, Germany.
Swen KoernerDepartment of Training Pedagogy and Martial Research, German Sports University Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We develop a form-theoretical account of knowing in empirically oriented sciences and argue for a paradox-oriented understanding of epistemic quality. Drawing on Spencer-Brown and Luhmann, we start from the idea that observation always operates by drawing a distinction and indicating one side. What appears as an object or "phenomenon" is thus the marked side of a form; its unmarked side persists as horizon. This implies an origin paradox of knowing: any knowing system can only operate by means of distinctions whose own contingency cannot be observed in the very act of use. We reconstruct how this paradox is functionally invisibilized and proliferates within science understood as a social system operating under the guiding distinction true/not-true. Programmes (methods, designs, standards), organizations and memory structures (journals, universities, reviews) distribute the paradox across three dimensions of scientific communication: in the factual dimension, as object formats, evidential hierarchies and growing residual categories; in the social dimension, as roles, communities and responsibility attributions; and in the temporal dimension, as replication cycles, escalation programmes and crisis semantics. This stabilizes an implicit quality paradigm that equates quality with coherence, consensus and cumulative stability. As an alternative, we propose a paradox-oriented quality concept: quality in this perspective lies in how a system addresses the constitutive paradox of its own observation without blocking its autopoiesis. We conceptualize quality as a calibrated rhythm of invisibilizing and briefly exposing the form of observation, increasing both robustness and the range of next possible operations. While developed with reference to empirical science, the argument generalizes to any knowing system.

Indexed as

empirical scienceepistemic qualityform theoryparadoxreflexivityscientific rigorsystems theorytreatment-prevalence paradox

Identifiers

PMID42327377
PMCPMC13275374

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.