The Transverse Science and Technology Culture: Dynamics and Roles of Research-technology

Shinn, Terry; Joerges, Bernward

doi:10.1177/0539018402041002003

Cited by 71 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, as mentioned ear-lier, both the specialisation of the laboratory and practices rely on established scientific disciplines and no strong ties, overlaps and integration can be strictly identified. So, multidisciplinarity is more suitable in order to characterise the movement of scientists between different areas of research (Shinn and Joerges, 2002;Shinn and Ragouet, 2000) than a real interdisciplinarity in scientific research. This point is related to the limited multidisciplinarity aspect of N&N (Bassecoulard et al, 2007;Rafols and Meyer, 2007;Schummer, 2004b;Schummer, 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Convergence and multidisciplinarity in nanotechnology: Laboratories as technological hubs

Battard¹

2012

Technovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Convergence and multidisciplinarity in nanotechnology: Laboratories as technological hubs

Battard¹

2012

Technovation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assertive Prussian ambitions and aggrandisement, the explosive growth of German industry and extension into new chemical, electrical, naval, and infrastructure domains, swift progress in science research, government determination to introduce and impose strong standards and norms on industrial products, and keen interest among some instrument makers, to compete internationally with the French and British and to transform the fundamental logic of their craft combined to forge a new regime of science production and diffusion (cf. Joerges & Shinn, 2001;Shinn & Joerges, 2002;Shinn & Ragouet, 2005;Shinn, 2008). German culture thus became the nexus for the rise of the research-technology regime.…”

Section: The Research-technology Regimementioning

confidence: 99%

Regimes of science production and diffusion: towards a transverse organization of knowledge

Marcovich¹,

Shinn²

2012

Sci. stud.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article is a contribution to the critical sociology of science perspective introduced and developed by Pierre Bourdieu. The paper proposes a transversalist theory of science and technology production and diffusion. It is here argued that science and technology are comprised of multiple regimes where each regime is historically grounded, possesses its own division of labour, modes of cognitive and artifact production and has specific audiences. The major regimes include the disciplinary regime, utilitarian regime, transitory regime and research-technology regime. Though each regime is autonomous, they are simultaneously closely interlaced. In science and technology, autonomy is not antithetical to interdependence and reciprocity. This study demonstrates for the four specified regimes of production and diffusion that differentiation is not contrary to interaction. In science, differentiation and interaction comprise two sides of the same coin. All regimes exhibit a measure of transversality.

show abstract

“…We believe that the main novelty of this approach is that the analysis is fine-grained and based on a detailed scientific and technical investigation of the research specialty. This degree of detail allows for the inclusion of a dimension to examine instrumentalities (i.e., the use of methods, materials and instrumentation), which have often been portrayed as playing a crucial interstitial role among disciplines (PRICE, 1984;SHINN & JOERGES, 2002) and between the various subfields of nanotechnology (MEYER, 2007).…”

Section: Studying Cross-disciplinaritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…instrumentalities, following De Solla Price's terminology, are thought to be a major driver of cross-disciplinary research (PRICE, 1984;HOLLINGSWORTH & HOLLINGSWORTH, 2000, p. 237;SHINN & JOERGES, 2002). We examined the use of instrumentalities in each project.…”

Section: Instrumentalitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? Explorations in the specialty of molecular motors

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nanotechnology has been presented in the policy discourse as an intrinsically interdisciplinary field, requiring collaborations among researchers with different backgrounds, and specific funding schemes supporting knowledge-integration activities. Early bibliometric studies supported this interdisciplinary vision (MEYER & PERSSON, 1998), but recent results suggest that nanotechnology is (yet) a mixed bag with various mono-disciplinary subfields (SCHUMMER, 2004). We have reexamined the issue at the research project level, carrying out five case studies in molecular motors, a specialty of bionanotechnology. Relying both in data from interviews and bibliometric indicators, we have developed a multidimensional analysis (SANZ-MENÉNDEZ et al., 2001) in order to explore the extent and types of cross-disciplinary practices in each project. We have found that there is a consistent high degree of cross-disciplinarity in the cognitive practices of research (i.e., use of references and instrumentalities) but a more erratic and narrower degree in the social dimensions (i.e., affiliation and researchers' background). This suggests that cross-disciplinarity is an eminently epistemic characteristic and that bibliometric indicators based on citations and references capture more accurately the generation of cross-disciplinary knowledge than approaches tracking co-authors' disciplinary affiliations. In the light of these findings we raise the question whether policies focusing on formal collaborations between laboratories are the most appropriate to facilitate cross-disciplinary knowledge acquisition and generation.I. RAFOLS, M. MEYER: How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? 634 Scientometrics 70 (2007)

show abstract

The Transverse Science and Technology Culture: Dynamics and Roles of Research-technology

Abstract: A bstract. Science

Cited by 71 publications

References 20 publications

Convergence and multidisciplinarity in nanotechnology: Laboratories as technological hubs

Convergence and multidisciplinarity in nanotechnology: Laboratories as technological hubs

Regimes of science production and diffusion: towards a transverse organization of knowledge

How cross-disciplinary is bionanotechnology? Explorations in the specialty of molecular motors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About