A Pluralistic Approach to Interactional Expertise

Plaisance, Kathryn S.; Kennedy, Eric B.

doi:10.1016/j.shpsa.2014.07.001

Cited by 25 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In work seeking to improve the SEE framework, both Plaisance and Kennedy (2014) and Goddiksen (2014), identify two definitions of interactional expertise within Collins and Evan's work. Both identify an earlier definition that Plaisance and Kennedy argue is focused upon what is needed to allow someone to "interact interestingly" with a contributory expert (Collins and Evans, 2002, p. 254), and that Goddiksen argues relates to the capacity to speak the language of the domain.…”

Section: An Analytical Framework For Understanding Interdisciplinaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Goddiksen, like us, is specifically interested in using SEE to study interdisciplinarity, and makes the argument that using a broader definition of interactional expertise (to, for example, include university students) furthers this agenda, while also arguing that text-based primary source knowledge alone can inform low level interactional expertise, a point that stands in opposition to Ribeiro and Lima's (2016) insistence that physical contiguity is a necessity, and also countered by Reyes-Galindo and Duarte (2015) who reassert Collins and Evans original account that immersion is essential. Plaisance and Kennedy's (2014) interest in the earlier definition is to expand those included as interactional experts to further democratise science, as part of what they call a pluralistic approach to interactional expertise. In this account they urge analysts to explore who interactional experts are, why they became experts, and how they use their expertise.…”

Section: An Analytical Framework For Understanding Interdisciplinaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analysing the role of virtualisation and visualisation on interdisciplinary knowledge exchange in stem cell research processes

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interdisciplinary work is an increasingly frequent and important aspect of scientific research. However, successful knowledge exchange and collaboration between experts is itself a challenging activity with both technical and social components that require consideration. Here, this article analyses the cultural factors involved in interdisciplinary research, specifically in the context of a software programme designed to improve knowledge exchange. The authors undertook an ethnographic study to understand the impact of virtualisation and visualisation on an interdisciplinary research team, working together to develop novel imaging technologies for investigating stem cells. In this discovery-research environment the challenge was to determine the socio-technical effect of an in-house software tool called ProtocolNavigator, which provided a virtual laboratory environment for the team to simulate and map their 'real-life laboratory' activities. This display, together with activity icons and a timeline, could be visually analysed and transferred between multiinstitutional researchers in a non-narrative approach. The aim of the work reported here is to provide the first detailed analysis of how software of this type is used in practice, and to analyse this through a robust social science-based perspective. Subsequently this study examines the effectiveness of this virtual laboratory environment on enhancing communication and understanding using a theoretical framework drawing upon three insights from the Sociology of Expertise and Experience: (i) interactional and contributory expertise, (ii) knowledge exchange and interpretative flexibility, and (iii) trading zones. The framework was extended by introducing the notion of material, concept and practice trade at these trading zones with a demonstration of how interactive visualisation of interconnected trading routes can empower interdisciplinary work. The addition of Foucault's classic account of power found evidence of a panoptical effect due to the augmented visibility of each other's work. In summary, the article offers a theoretical framework together with novel analysis to determine the influence of introducing tools and approaches designed to enhance interdisciplinary working-particularly in the context of knowledge sharing and trust.

show abstract

Section: An Analytical Framework For Understanding Interdisciplinaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: An Analytical Framework For Understanding Interdisciplinaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysing the role of virtualisation and visualisation on interdisciplinary knowledge exchange in stem cell research processes

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Selinger and Mix (2004) argued that interactional experts might have special interactional skills (what we called 'interactive ability') in talking about expertises that were not their own and in translating between communities. Plaisance and Kennedy also pick up this idea in their critique (Plaisance and Kennedy 2014). This seems to us to be an expertise' was not used in these early contributions but the idea that language and practice must be separated if we are to be clear about the different relationship of the collectivity and the individual to a form-of-life is the key.…”

Section: The Separation Principlementioning

confidence: 99%

“…With this re-visit to the idea of interactional expertise in mind we can look at the recent critiques and proposed amendments of IE by Plaisance and Kennedy (2014) and by Goddiksen (2014), along with the reply to the later by RGD. PK want to go back to the definition found in the 2002, Third Wave, publication.…”

Section: Recent Critiques Of Interactional Expertisementioning

confidence: 99%

“…We will not be able to resolve all the problems but we will assemble our newly evolved understanding of what it is to make a contribution to specialist domains and to technological decision-making in the public domain. The immediate occasion for revisiting these concepts is the 2014 discussion of interactional expertise by Plaisance and Kennedy (2014) (PK) and the debate between Goddiksen (2014), and Reyes-Galindo and Duarte (2015 -RGD). We believe the new papers published here provide a clearer framework for their project.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Expertise revisited, Part I—Interactional expertise

Collins

Evans

2015

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“We're taking their brilliant minds”: Science teacher expertize, meta‐discourse, and the challenges of teacher–scientist collaboration

Shanahan

Bechtel

2019

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Programs that bring teachers and scientists together have continued to achieve attention as important potential contributions to science education. Often, however, those programs place teachers in the position of learner or apprentice to the scientists. This study examines a teacher-scientist partnership program (two project sites, two teachers and one scientist at each) that explicitly sought to challenge that model, bringing science teachers into science labs to share their expertize in a collaborative project. Using a framework that probes both the actors' and analysts' perspectives on expertize, this study examines whether the promise of the program's goal for mutual learning through collaboration can be met. Analysis of interviews and collaborative products focused on evidence of contributory and interactional expertize to understand if the project was able to bring together a group that was likely to be able to collaborate successfully.Metadiscourse was then probed to gain a deeper understanding of the ways in which they spoke of the expertize of their collaborators. Findings suggest that creating collaborative teams with ideal expertize matches is challenging and that collaborative efforts are complicated by the historic status of scientific and teaching expertizes especially in relation to outreach or knowledge translation projects.

show abstract

A Pluralistic Approach to Interactional Expertise

Cited by 25 publications

References 12 publications

Analysing the role of virtualisation and visualisation on interdisciplinary knowledge exchange in stem cell research processes

Analysing the role of virtualisation and visualisation on interdisciplinary knowledge exchange in stem cell research processes

Expertise revisited, Part I—Interactional expertise

“We're taking their brilliant minds”: Science teacher expertize, meta‐discourse, and the challenges of teacher–scientist collaboration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About