Tokamaks and turbulence: research ensembles, policy and technoscientific work

Hackett, Edward J.; Conz, David; Parker, John N.; Bashford, Jonathon; DeLay, Susan

doi:10.1016/j.respol.2003.12.002

Cited by 38 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They are therefore more willing to present their research results in a form that can be properly evaluated and preferably cited by their peers. They must be traditional enough to establish strategic similarities that connect their work to that of others in the field, yet original enough to establish strategic differences that impart novelty to their work (Hackett, 2005;Hackett et al, 2004). Under the 2 When Edison began his research on the incandescent light bulb, the technology already existed for lighting up a filament inside a glass bulb by conducting an electric current into it.…”

Section: Bohr Scientistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does the entrepreneurial orientation of scientists affect their scientific performance? Evidence from the quadrant model

Shichijo

Sedita

Baba

2015

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using Stokes's (1997) "quadrant model of scientific research," this paper deals with how the entrepreneurial orientation of scientists affects their scientific performance by considering its impact on scientific production (number of publications), scientific prestige (number of forward citations), and breadth of research activities (interdisciplinarity). The results of a quantitative analysis applied to a sample of 1,957 scientific papers published by 66 scientists active in advanced materials research in Japan found that (i) entrepreneurial scientists publish more papers than traditional scientists do, (ii) the papers published by Bohr scientists (traditional scientists with a stronger intention to fundamentality) demonstrate better citation performance than those published by Pasteur scientists (entrepreneurial scientists with a stronger intention to fundamentality) do, on average; (iii) if the focus is confined to high-impact papers, their prestige (i.e., forward citation counts) is favored by the authorship of Pasteur scientists; and (iv) the portfolio interdisciplinarity of papers authored by Pasteur scientists is higher (more diverse) than that of Bohr scientists.2

show abstract

Section: Bohr Scientistsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does the entrepreneurial orientation of scientists affect their scientific performance? Evidence from the quadrant model

Shichijo

Sedita

Baba

2015

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bloch highlights-in a very positive way-the options for shaping science and technology (shaping orientation), including intentions (towards the concrete utopia of the future). 22 Hackett et al developed a concept of ''research ensemble'' using the example of fusion research in order to describe an arrangement of ''materials, methods, instruments, established practices … ideas, and enabling theories'' which is not only constructed and used by researchers, but also reflects the connection to policymakers and the various influences on the research trajectories (Hackett et al 2004). …”

Section: The Example Of Fusion Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a prospective technology assessment: challenges and requirements for technology assessment in the age of technoscience

Liebert

Schmidt

2010

Poiesis Prax

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this paper is to contribute to the expanding discourse on conceptual elements of TA. As a point of departure, it takes the recent transformation of the science, technology and innovation system (''technoscience''). We will show that the age of technoscience can be regarded as presenting not only a challenge, but also a chance and opportunity for TA. Embracing this opportunity, however, implies imposing several requirements on TA. In order to specify these requirements and to foster the ongoing discourse on the foundations of TA, this paper suggests a programmatic term: prospective technology assessment (ProTA). This term is intended mainly as a reflection framework, aimed at providing an extension and complement-and not a replacement-of well-established TA concepts. Three requirements for ProTA are sketched: (1) early stage orientation-the temporal dimension, (2) intention and potential orientation-the knowledge dimension, (3) shaping orientation-the power/actor dimension. Examples from fusion and nano research will illustrate the need for ProTA, as well as its specific focus. The paper concedes that ProTA is in its infancy and that there is a clear need for further clarification.Zusammenfassung Dieser Aufsatz möchte einen programmatischen Beitrag zur Theorie-Diskussion der TA leisten. Als deskriptive Basis für eine effektive TA erscheint hierfür die Berücksichtigung der derzeitigen Veränderung des Wissenschafts-, Technologie-und Innovationssystems (,,technoscience'') notwendig. Die Technoscience kann eher als eine Chance für TA denn als ein Problem

show abstract

“…Here the focus of the analysis is on the work of scientists directly on the shop floor, and special attention is given to problem framing, technical practices and process thinking, regarding both individual scientists and research teams (Owen-Smith, 1999;Hackett, 2004). In this stream of research, not yet incorporated into the economic debate on science and technology, fresh insights into how the actual work of science is done challenge the traditional view of the issue, well beyond the dichotomy of applied vs. fundamental knowledge.…”

Section: Problem Solving and Instrument Development In Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Do scientists get fundamental research ideas by solving practical problems?

Franzoni¹

2009

Industrial and Corporate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We discuss the problem-solving nature of scientific activity and maintain that contributions made in the form of improved methodologies, new technologies and instruments for research are, and will increasingly become, central in experimental sciences and in fields traditionally the realm of pure intellectual speculation. The contribution of scientists to the development of new technologies and techniques for research purposes largely exceeds their contribution to developing technologies for industrial purposes, although the former easily blurs into the latter. We verify the effect of both types of contributions on the productivity of a sample of American star physicists, and show that improving research technologies always boosts the productivity of scientists, whereas developing industrial technologies is beneficial only when the technology stems from research applications.

show abstract

Tokamaks and turbulence: research ensembles, policy and technoscientific work

Cited by 38 publications

References 28 publications

How does the entrepreneurial orientation of scientists affect their scientific performance? Evidence from the quadrant model

How does the entrepreneurial orientation of scientists affect their scientific performance? Evidence from the quadrant model

Towards a prospective technology assessment: challenges and requirements for technology assessment in the age of technoscience

Do scientists get fundamental research ideas by solving practical problems?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About