“Should We Stay or Should We Go now?”

IF 1.9 4区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Karen Kastenhofer, Niki Vermeulen
{"title":"“Should We Stay or Should We Go now?”","authors":"Karen Kastenhofer, Niki Vermeulen","doi":"10.23987/sts.113479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we focus on a special feature of science and technology studies: the trajectories of our engagement with ‘emerging technosciences’. Many of us entertain close links to a particular group of scientists; our scholarly careers and identities build around thematic specialisations, trans-field collaborations and convivialities. But more often than not, such engagement does not last a whole career. With every new technoscientific hype, scholars are pressed to ‘move on’, to disengage from one field and re-engage with another. It thus seems warranted to explicitly reflect on the temporal patterns of dis/engagement and to look at possible ramifications for individuals, collectives, and the innovation system at large. To inform such reflection, we opted for a mixed-methods approach, tracing patterns and moments of dis/engagement across various disciplines based on scientometric analysis, individual archaeologies of engagement, a qualitative survey, and a focused discussion among fellow scholars from the social sciences and humanities as well as the sciences. Our analysis brings distinct dis/engagement patterns to the fore, relating to disciplinary affiliations as well as career stages. In our conclusion, we discuss the relevance of these findings for science and technology studies scholars and technoscientists as well as for contemporary innovation regimes more generally.","PeriodicalId":45119,"journal":{"name":"Science and Technology Studies","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Technology Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.113479","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper we focus on a special feature of science and technology studies: the trajectories of our engagement with ‘emerging technosciences’. Many of us entertain close links to a particular group of scientists; our scholarly careers and identities build around thematic specialisations, trans-field collaborations and convivialities. But more often than not, such engagement does not last a whole career. With every new technoscientific hype, scholars are pressed to ‘move on’, to disengage from one field and re-engage with another. It thus seems warranted to explicitly reflect on the temporal patterns of dis/engagement and to look at possible ramifications for individuals, collectives, and the innovation system at large. To inform such reflection, we opted for a mixed-methods approach, tracing patterns and moments of dis/engagement across various disciplines based on scientometric analysis, individual archaeologies of engagement, a qualitative survey, and a focused discussion among fellow scholars from the social sciences and humanities as well as the sciences. Our analysis brings distinct dis/engagement patterns to the fore, relating to disciplinary affiliations as well as career stages. In our conclusion, we discuss the relevance of these findings for science and technology studies scholars and technoscientists as well as for contemporary innovation regimes more generally.
“我们现在该走还是该留?”
在本文中,我们关注科学和技术研究的一个特殊特征:我们与“新兴技术”接触的轨迹。我们中的许多人与一群特定的科学家有着密切的联系;我们的学术生涯和身份建立在专题专业,跨领域合作和娱乐。但通常情况下,这种投入并不能持续整个职业生涯。随着每一次新的技术科学炒作,学者们都被迫“继续前进”,从一个领域退出,重新投入另一个领域。因此,似乎有必要明确地反思脱离/参与的时间模式,并研究对个人、集体和整个创新系统可能产生的影响。为了提供这样的反思信息,我们选择了一种混合方法,基于科学计量分析、个人参与考古、定性调查以及来自社会科学、人文科学和科学领域的学者之间的集中讨论,追踪不同学科的分离/参与模式和时刻。我们的分析将不同的离职/敬业模式带到了前台,这些模式与学科隶属关系和职业阶段有关。在我们的结论中,我们讨论了这些发现对科学技术研究学者和技术科学家以及更普遍的当代创新制度的相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Science and Technology Studies
Science and Technology Studies HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
审稿时长
53 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信