In search of sensitive ethnography of change: Tracing the invisible Handoffs from Technology Developers to Users

Mind, Culture, and Activity

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 90-112

  Hasu, Mervi ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^b FINNISH INSTITUTE OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH   (Finland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61149169173     PISSN: 10749039     EISSN: 15327884     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327884mca1202_2     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Amit, V. (Ed.). (2000). Constructing the field. Ethnographic fieldwork in the contemporary world. London: Routledge
2. Coffey, A. (1999). The ethnographic self. Fieldwork and the representation of identity. London: Sage
3. Dreier, O. (1999). Personal trajectories of participation across contexts of social practice. Outlines - Critical Social Studies, 1, 5-32
4. Engeström, R. (1999). Imagine the world you want to live in: A study on developmental change in doctor-patient interaction. Outlines - Critical Social Studies, 1, 33-50
5. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit
6. Engeström, Y. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 64-103). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
7. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity-theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133-156
8. Engeström, Y., Engeström, R.,& Vähäaho, T. (1999). When the center does not hold: The importance of knotworking. In S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard,& U. J. Jensen (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice: Cultural-historical approaches (pp. 345-374). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press
9. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R-L. (Eds.). (1998). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press
10. Forsythe, D. (1999). "It's just a matter of common sense": Ethnography as invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 8, 127-145
11. Faulkner, W. (2000). The power and the pleasure? A research agenda for "making gender stick" to engineers. Science, Technology and Human Values, 25, 87-119
12. Gherardi, S. (1995). Gender, symbolism, and organizational cultures. London: Sage
13. Hammerslay, M., & Atkinson, P. (1995). Ethnography: Principles in practice (2nd ed.). London: Routledge
14. Hasu, M. (2000a). Constructing clinical use: An activity-theoretical perspective on implementing new technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 12, 369-382
15. Hasu, M. (2000b). Blind men and the elephant: Implementation of a new artifact as an expansive possibility. Outlines-Critical Social Studies, 2, 5-41
16. Hasu, M. (2001a). Critical transition from developers to users. Activity-theoretical studies of interaction and learning in the innovation process. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki, Finland
17. Hasu, M. (2001b). The power of interdependence.Areview essay of "creative collaboration" by Vera John-Steiner. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 367-368
18. Hasu, M., & Engeström, Y. (2000). Measurement in action. An activity-theoretical perspective on producer-user interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53, 61-89
19. John-Steiner, V. (2000). Creative collaboration. New York: Oxford University Press
20. Katz, A., & Shotter, J. (1996). Hearing the patient's "voice": Toward a social poetics in diagnostic interviews. Social Science and Medicine, 43, 919-931
21. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge. An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon
22. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Bristol, England: Open University Press
23. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life. The social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
24. Leont'ev, A. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall
25. Lynch, M. (1985). Art and artifact in laboratory science. The study of shop work and shop talk in a research laboratory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul
26. McLaughlin, J., Rosen, P., Skinner, D., & Webster, A. (1999). Valuing technology, organizations, culture and change. London: Routledge
27. Miettinen, R. (1998). Object construction and networks in research work: The case of research on cellulose degrading enzymes. Social Studies of Science, 28, 423-463
28. Miettinen, R. (1999). The riddle of things: Activity theory and actor-network theory as approaches to studying innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6, 170-195
29. Miettinen, R., & Hasu, M. (1999, October). Dialogue and intervention in science and technology studies. Whose point of view? Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Society for Social Studies of Science, San Diego, CA
30. Minnis, M.,& John-Steiner, V. (2001). Are we ready for a single, integrated theory? Human Development, 44, 296-310
31. Saari, E. (2003). The pulse of change in research work. Development of the object of research, collaboration and the division of labor in a research group. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Helsinki, Finland
32. Star, S.,& Strauss, A. (1999). Layers of silence, arenas of voice: The ecology of visible and invisible work. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Journal of Collaborative Computing, 8, 9-30
33. Star, S. L. (1991a). Invisible work and silenced dialogues in knowledge representation. In I. Eriksson, B. Kitchenham, & K. Tijdens (Eds.), Women, work and computerization (pp. 81-92). Amsterdam: Elsevier
34. Star, S. L. (1991b). Power, technology and the phenomenology of conventions: On being allergic to onions. In J. Law (Ed.), Sociological review monograph: Vol. 38. A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 26-56). London: Routledge
35. Suchman, L. (2001). Located accountabilities in technology production. Retrieved 24.1.2002, from Online Papers, Department of Sociology, Lancaster University: http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/papers/suchman-located- accountabilities. pdf
36. Wylie, A. (1994). Reasoning about ourselves: Feminist methodology in the social sciences. In M. Martin& L. C. McIntyre (Eds.), Readings in the philosophy of social sciences (pp. 611-624). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press