Managing misunderstandings: The role of language in interdisciplinary scientific collaboration

Science Communication

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 6-28

  Monteiro Dr , Marko ^a   Keating, Elizabeth ^b  

^a Institute of Technological Research   (Brazil)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Communication; Computer models; Cyberinfrastructures; Ethnography; Interdisciplinary research

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350125544     PISSN: 10755470     EISSN: 15528545     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1075547008330922     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Alač, M., & Hutchins, E. (2004). I see what you are saying: Action as cognition in MRI brain mapping practice. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 4, 629-661.
2. Arber, A. (2007). Pain Talk in hospice and palliative care team meetings: An ethnography. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44, 916-926.
3. Baird, F., Moore, C.J., & Jagodzinski, A.P. (2000). An ethnographic study of engineering design teams at Rolls-Royce Aerospace. Design Studies, 21, 333-355.
4. Bracken, C.J. (2006). What do you mean? The importance of language in developing interdisciplinary research. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31, 371-382.
5. Clarke, A.E., Shim, J., Mamo, J., Forsket, J., & Fishman, J. (2003). Biomedicalization: Technoscientific transformations of health, illness and US biomedicine. American Sociological Review, 68, 161-194.
6. Daston, L., & Galiston, P. (1990). The image of objectivity. Representations, 40, 81-128.
7. Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1993). Talk at work. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Elias, N. (1982). Scientific establishments. In N. Elias, H. Martins, & R. Whitley (Eds.), Scientific establishments and hierarchies (pp. 3-71). London: D. Reidel.
9. Fasulo, A., & Zucchermaglio, C. (2002). My selves and I: Identity markers in work meeting talk. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1119-1144.
10. Forsythe, D. (1993). Engineering knowledge: The construction of knowledge in artificial intelligence. Social Studies of Science, 23, 445-477.
11. Forsythe, D. (1998). Using ethnography to investigate life scientists' information needs. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 86, 402-409.
12. Hafernik, J.J., Messerschmitt, D.S., & Vandrick, S. (1997). Collaborative research: Why and how? Educational Researcher, 26, 31-35.
13. Helmreich, S. (1998). Silicon second nature: Culturing artificial life in a digital world. Berkeley: University of California Press.
14. Hey, V. (2001). The construction of academic time: Sub/Contracting academic labour in research. Journal of Educational Policy, 16, 67-84.
15. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.
16. Jeffrey, P. (2003). Smoothing the waters: Observations on the process of cross-disciplinary research collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 33, 539-562.
17. Katz, J.S., & Martin, B.R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26, 1-18.
18. Keating, E. (2000). How culture and technology together shape new communicative practices: Investigating interactions between deaf and hearing callers with computer mediated video-telephone. Texas Linguistic Forum, 43, 99-116.
19. Keating, E. (2006). Habits and innovations: Designing language for new, technologically mediated sociality. In N. J. Enfield & S. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction (pp. 329-350). Oxford, UK: Berg/Wenner-Gren.
20. Keating, E., & Mirus, G. (2003). American sign language in virtual space: Interactions between deaf users of computer-mediated video communication and the impact of technology on language practices. Language in Society, 32, 693-714.
21. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
22. Knorr-Cetina, K., & Amann, K. (1990). Image dissection in natural scientific inquiry. Science, Technology and Human Values, 15, 259-283.
23. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24. Kunda, G. (1992). Engineering culture: Control and commitment in a high-tech corporation. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
25. Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 19-68). Cambridge: MIT Press.
26. Latour, B. (1995). The 'Pedofil' of Boa Vista: A photo-philosophical montage. Common Knowledge, 4, 144-187.
27. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
28. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (Eds.). (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
29. Lenoir, T. (2004). The virtual surgeon: New practices for an age of medialization. In R. Mitchell & P. Thurtle (Eds.), Data made flesh: Embodying information (pp. 137-153). New York: Routledge.
30. Lieberman, A. (1986). Collaborative research: Working with, not working on. Educational Leadership, 43, 28-32.
31. Lynch, M. (1990). The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 153-186). Cambridge: MIT Press.
32. Lynch, M. (2006). The production of scientific images: Vision and re-vision in the history, philosophy and sociology of science. In L. Pauwels (Ed.), Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication (pp. 26-41). Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College Press.
33. Lynch, M., & Woolgar, S. (1990). Introduction: Sociological orientations to representational practice in science. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 1-19). Cambridge: MIT Press.
34. Mauthner, N., & Doucet, A. (2008). Knowledge once divided can be hard to put together again: An epistemological critique of collaborative and team-based research practices. Sociology, 42, 971-985.
35. Mayer, R. (1989). Systematic thinking fostered by illustrations in scientific text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 240-246.
36. Mayer, R., Bove, W., Bryman, A., Mars, R., & Tapangco, L. (1996). When less is more: Meaningful learning from visual and verbal summaries of science textbook lessons. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 64-73.
37. McCallin, A. (2006). Interdisciplinary researching: Exploring the opportunities and risks of working together. Nursing and Health Sciences, 8, 88-94.
38. Mountz, A., Miyares, J.M., Wright, R., & Bailey, A.J. (2003). Methodologically becoming: Power, knowledge and team research. Gender, Place and Culture, 10, 29-46.
39. Ochs, E., Jacoby, S., & Gonzales, P. (1994). Interpretive journeys: How physicists talk and travel through graphic space. Configurations, 2, 151-171.
40. Ochs, E., Jacoby, S., & Gonzales, P. (1996). When I come down I'm in the domain state: Grammar and graphic representation in the interpretive activity of physics. In E. Ochs, E. Schlegloff, & S. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 328-369). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
41. Pauwels, L. (Ed.). (2006). Visual cultures of science: Rethinking representational practices in knowledge building and science communication. Hanover, NH: Dartmouth College Press.
42. Pickering, A. (Ed.). (1992). Science as practice and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
43. Presser, S. (1980). Collaboration and the quality of research. Social Studies of Science, 10, 95-101.
44. Rheinberger, H.-J. (1992a). Experiment, difference and writing: I. Tracing protein synthesis. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 23, 305-331.
45. Rheinberger, H.-J. (1992b). Experiment, difference and writing: II. The laboratory production of transfer RNA. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 23, 389-422.
46. Schieffelin, B., & Ochs, E. (Eds.). (1986). Language socialization across cultures. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
47. Schwartzman, H. (1987). The significance of meetings in an American mental health center. American Ethnologist, 14, 271-294.
48. Sperber, D. (2000). An objection to the memetic approach to culture. In R. Aunger (Ed.), Darwinizing culture: The status of memetics as a science (pp. 163-173). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
49. Suchman, L. (1993). Technologies of accountability. In G. Button (Ed.), Technology in working order. New York: Routledge.
50. Vygostky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
51. Wertsch, J.V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
52. Wilson, G., & Herndl, C. (2007). Boundary objects as rhetorical exigence: Knowledge mapping and interdisciplinary collaboration at Los Alamos National Laboratory. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 21, 129-154.
53. Yaros, R. (2006). Is it the medium or the message? Structuring complex news to enhance engagement and situational understanding by nonexperts. Communication Research, 33, 285-309.