Modeling Distributed Knowledge Processes in Next Generation Multidisciplinary Alliances

Information Systems Frontiers

Volumn 2, Issue 3-4, 2000, Pages 317-331

  Kanfer, Alaina G ^a   Haythornthwaite, Caroline ^a   Bruce, Bertram C ^a   Bowker, Geoffrey C ^b   Burbules, Nicholas C ^a   Porac, Joseph F ^d   Wade, James ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^d University of California ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034554071     PISSN: 13873326     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/a:1026520728644     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Badaracco J. The Knowledge Link: How Firms Compete Through Strategic Alliances. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1991.
2. Bowker GC. How to be Universal: Some cybernetic strategies, In: Social Studies of Science 1993;23:107-127.
3. Bowker GC, Star SL. Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.
4. Burt RS. Structural Holes, The Social Structure of Competition. Harvard University Press, 1992.
5. Carley K, Wendt K. Electronic mail and scientific communication. Knowledge 1991;12(4):406-440.
6. Chubin DE, Porter AL, Rossini FA, Connolly T. eds. Interdisciplinary Analysis and Research. Mt. Airy, MD: Lomond Publications, Inc. 1986.
7. Clarke AE, Fujimura JH. eds. The Right Tools for the Right Job: At Work in 20th-century Life Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.
8. Daft RL, Lengel R. Organizational information requirements, media richness, and structural design. Management Science 1986;32:554-571.
9. Dede C. The evolution of distance education: Emerging technologies and distributed learning. American Journal of Distance Education 1996;10(2):4-36.
10. Duncker-Gassen E. Multidisciplinary Research at the University of Twente. Enschede: Twente University Press, 1998.
11. Fujimura JH. Crafting Science: A Sociohistory of the Quest for the Genetics of Cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.
12. Galegher J, Kraut RE. Technology for intellectual teamwork: perspectives on research and design. In: Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work. Galegher J, Kraut RE, Egido C. eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990.
13. Galegher J, Kraut RE, Egido C. eds. Intellectual Teamwork: Social and Technological Foundations of Cooperative Work. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990.
14. Galison P. Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.
15. Granovetter MS. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 1973;78:1360-1380.
16. Granovetter MS. The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. In: PV Marsden, N Lin. eds. Social Structure and Network Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1982:105-130.
17. Gulati R. Alliances and networks. Strategic Management Journal 1998;19:293-317.
18. Hansen MT. The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly 1999;44:82-111.
19. Haythornthwaite C. Collaborative work networks among distributed learners, Proceedings of the 32nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, January 1999.
20. Haythornthwaite C. Social network analysis: An approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Library and Information Science Research 1996;18:323-342.
21. Haythornthwaite C, Wellman B. Work, friendship, and media use for information exchange in a networked organization. Journal of the American Society for Information Science. In press, 1998.
22. Heims, Steve J. The Cybernetics Group Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991.
23. Hesse BW, Sproull LS, Kiesler SP and Walsh JP. Returns to science: computer networks in oceanography. Communications of the ACM 1993;36(8):90-101.
24. Judson HF. The Eighth Day of Creation : Makers of the Revolution in Biology. Expanded edn. Plainview NY: CSHL Press, 1996.
25. Kay LE. The Molecular Vision of Life: Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.
26. Keller EF. Refiguring Life: Metaphors of Twentieth-Century Biology. New York: Columbia University Press, 1995.
27. Kogut B. What firms do? Coordination, identity, and learning. Organizational Science 1996;7(5):502-519.
28. Koschmann T (Ed.) CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 1996a.
29. Lakoff G, Johnson M. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980.
30. Latour B. Science in action: How to Follow Scientists and EngineersThroughSociety. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1987.
31. Lave J, Wenger E. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral Participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University, 1991.
32. Leonard-Barton D. The Wellsprings of Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1995.
33. McGrath JE. Groups, Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1984.
34. McPherson JM, Smith-Lovin L. Homophily in voluntary organizations: Status, distance, and the composition of face-to-face groups. American Sociology Review 1987;52:370-379.
35. Michaelson (a.k.a. Kanfer) AG. The development of scientific speciality as diffusion through social relations: The case of role analysis. Social Networks 1993;15:217-236.
36. Mullins N. Social Networks Among Biological Scientists. New York: Arno Press. 1980.
37. Pickering A, ed. Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
38. Price DJ. Little Science, Big Science ... and Beyond. New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1986.
39. Reddy MJ. The conduit metaphor - a case of frame conflict in our language about language. In: A. Ortony ed. Metaphor and Thought. London, England: Cambridge University Press, 1979:284-324.
40. Shannon CE. A mathematical theory of communication, Bell System Technical Journal 1948;27:379-423 and 623-656.
41. Sproull L, Kiesler S. Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1991.
42. Star SL, Griesemer J. Institutional ecology, translations, and coherence: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-1939. Social Studies of Science 1989;19:387-120.
43. Walsh J, Bayma T. Computer networks and scientific work. Social Studies of Science 1996;26:661-703.
44. Walsh J Kucker S, Maloney N, Gabbay S. Connecting minds: CMC and scientific work. Journal of the American Society for Information Science Available online at http://www.uic.edu/ ~ jwalsh/JASIS, 1999.
45. Wasserman S, Faust K. Social Network Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
46. Weaver W, Shannon CE, The Mathematical Theory of Communication, Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, republished in paperback 1963, 1949.
47. Wenger E, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
48. Wittezaele J. A la recherche de l'école de Palo Alto, Jean-Jacques Wittezaele, Teresa Garcia. Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1992.
49. Schiffer S. Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972.
50. Schiffer S. Remnants of meaning. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987.
51. Meggle G. Common belief and common knowledge. http:// lucs.lu.se/spinning/categories/decision/Meggle/index.html.
52. Bruce BC, Newman D. Interacting plans. Cognitive Science 1978;2:195-233.
53. Bruce BC, Levin JA. Educational technology: Media for inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1997;17(1):79-102.
54. Bruce BC, Levin JA. Roles for new technologies in language arts: Inquiry, communication, construction, and expression. In: Flood J and Lapp D Handbook of Research on Teaching the Language Arts. New York: Macmillan (in press).
55. Toulmin S. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1958.
56. Inkpen AC. Learning and knowledge acquisition through international strategic alliances. The Academy of Management Executive 1998;12(4):69-80.