Abstract
Stem cell researchers labor in unpredictable circumstances, beset by uncertainties allied to the study of cellular signaling behaviors. STS research, based primarily on the work of Star (1985), has demonstrated that medical scientists often approach these vicissitudes using a type of phronesis that aims to better qualify the causes of experimental ambiguities, while also identifying optimistic reference points to help guide future research. Knowledge of this type of phronesis is extended by this article, which examines the composition of the three most popular citations allied to the regenerative cellular biology/human-induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSC) literature. When analyzed, these papers afford evidence that the adducement of positive signals begins with sorting and categorizing. This article finds that, when representing the outcomes of this cataloging for peer-review consumption, the authors concerned predicated their observations in a perspicacious rhetoric, which serves to reinforce positive-leaning ascriptions by couching them in images of virtue, fortitude, and due diligence. The research findings presented herewith suggest that adducements of this kind may be anchored in a representational practice that could be described as “modal splicing.” This article contributes to the STS literature by observing connections between modal splicing, perspicacious representation, and knowledge affirmations in hiPSC contexts.