Case studies of e-infrastructure adoption

Social Science Computer Review

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 583-600

  Barjak, Franz ^a   Lane, Julia ^b   Kertcher, Zack ^b   Poschen, Meik ^c   Procter, Rob ^c   Robinson, Simon ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES AND ARTS NORTHWESTERN SWITZERLAND   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^c National Centre for e Social Science (NCeSS)   (United Kingdom)

^d empirica Communication and Technology Research ^*  (Germany)

Author keywords

Adoption; Case studies; e Infrastructure; e Social Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350493814     PISSN: 08944393     EISSN: 15528286     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0894439309332310     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. ACLS Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for the Humanities and Social Sciences (2006). Our cultural commonwealth. New York: ACLS. Retrieved December 19, 2006, from http://www.acls.org/cyberinfrastructure/OurCulturalCommonwealth.pdf.
2. Adams, J.D., Black, G.C., Clemmons, J.R., & Stephan, P.E. (2005). Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities, 1981-1999. Research Policy, 34, 259-285.
3. Anderson, B., & Carlson, S. (2006). Entangled data: Knowledge & community making in e (social) science- research report to the ESRC. (No. 2006-15). Ipswich, UK: Chimera, University of Essex.
4. Avery, P. (2007). Open science grid: Building and sustaining general cyberinfrastructure using a collaborative approach [Electronic Version]. First Monday, 12. Retrieved November 9, 2006, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_6/avery/.
5. Barjak, F., Wiegand, G., Lane, J., Poschen, M., Procter, R., & Robinson, S. (2007). Accelerating Transition to Virtual Research Organization in Social Science (AVROSS): First results from a survey of e-infrastructure adopters. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on e-Social Science. Retrieved April 4, 2008, from http://ess.si.umich.edu/papers/paper141.pdf.
6. Berman, F., & Brady, H. (2005). Final Report: NSF SBE-CISE Workshop on Cyberinfrastructure and the Social Sciences. Retrieved October 3, 2006, from http://vis.sdsc.edu/sbe/reports/SBE-CISE-FINAL.pdf.
7. Bijker, W.E. (1987). The social construction of bakelite: Toward a theory of invention. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. J. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems (1sted., pp. 159-187). Cambridge, MA; London: MIT Press.
8. Bijker, W.E. (1997). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Birkin, M., Turner, A., & Wu, B. (2006). A synthetic demographic model of the UK population: Methods, progress and problems. Proceedings of the 2nd e-Social Science Conference, Manchester, 28-30 June. Retrieved September 29, 2008, from http://www.ncess.ac.uk/events/conference/2006/papers/papers/BirkinSyntheticDemographicModelOfUKPopulation.pdf.
10. Carlson, S., & Anderson, B. (2007). What are data? The many kinds of data and their implications for data re-use. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 635-651.
11. Catlett, C. (2006). The state of TeraGrid-A national production cyberinfrastructure facility. Retrieved September 29, 2006, from http://www.teragrid.org/about/docs/StateOfTeraGridJune2006.pdf.
12. Dittrich, Y., Eriksén, S., & Wessels, B. (2003). From knowledge transfer to situated innovation. Paper presented at the Innovation in Europe Conference: Dynamics, Institutions and Values. Retrieved April 4, 2008, from http://www.bth.se/fou/forskinfo.nsf/alfs/8778ce68e1ead172c1256cfc00508748.
13. Economic and Social Research Council. (2004). e-Science and the social sciences framework document. Retrieved April 14, 2008, from http://www.esrc.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/Images/Escience%20Background%20Information_tcm6-5783.pdf.
14. Edwards, P.N., Jackson, S.J., Bowker, G., & Knobel, C.P. (2007). Understanding infrastructure: Dynamics, tensions, and design. Report of a workshop on history and theory of infrastructure: Lessons for new scientific cyberinfrastructure. Retrieved July 29, 2007, from http://www.si.umich.edu/InfrastructureWorkshop/documents/UnderstandingInfrastructure2007.pdf.
15. Fleck, J. (1988). Innofusion or diffusation? The nature of technological development in robotics. Edinburgh PICT Working Paper No. 7, Edinburgh University.
16. Fleck, J. (1994). Learning by trying: The implementation of configurational technology. Research Policy, 23, 637-652.
17. Fleck, J., Webster, J., & Williams, R. (1990). Dynamics of information technology implementation: A reassessment of paradigms and trajectories of development. Futures, 22, 618-640.
18. Galison, L.P. (1997). Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.
19. Grose, D., Crouchley, R., & van Ark, T. (2006). sabreR: Grid-enabling the analysis of multi-process random effect response data in R. Proceedings from the 4th e-Social Science Conference, Manchester, 28-30 June. Retrieved September 29, 2008, from http://www.ncess.ac.uk/events/conference/2006/papers/papers/GroseSabreR.pdf.
20. Hodgson, S.M., & Clark, T. (2007). Sociological engagements with computing: The advent of e-science and some implications for the qualitative research community [Electronic Version]. Sociological Research Online, 12. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from http://www.socresonline.org.uk/12/3/9.html.
21. Kahin, B. (2007). Cyberinfrastructure and innovation policy [Electronic Version]. First Monday, 12. Retrieved November 9, 2006, from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_6/kahin/.
22. Kling, R., & McKim, G. (2000). Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 1306-1320.
23. Lawrence, K. (2006). Walking the tightrope: The balancing acts of a large e-research project. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 15, 385-411.
24. Leenaars, M., Heikkurinen, M., Louridas, P., & Karayannis, F. (2005). e-Infrastructures roadmap. Retrieved November 23, 2006, from http://www.e-irg.org/roadmap/eIRG-roadmap.pdf.
25. MacKenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (1999). Introductory essay: The social shaping of technology. In D. MacKenzie, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The social shaping of technology (2nd ed., pp. 3-27). Buckingham, U.K.: Open University Press.
26. Miettinen, R., & Hasu, M. (2002). Articulating user needs in collaborative design: Towards an activity-theoretical approach. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 11, 129-151.
27. Molina, A.H. (1997). Insights into the nature of technology diffusion and implementation: The perspective of sociotechnical alignment. Technovation, 17, 601-626.
28. Peters, S., Clark, K., Ekin, P., Le Blanc, A., & Pickles, S. (2007). Grid enabling empirical economics: A microdata application. Computational Economics, 30, 349-370.
29. Rogers, E.M. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. (4th ed.). New York: Free Press.
30. Savage, M., & Burrows, R. (2007). The coming crisis of empirical sociology. Sociology, 41, 885-899.
31. Spinuzzi, C. (2003). Tracing genres through organizations: A sociocultural approach to information design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Vanneschi, M. (2005). Survey of activities in universities and research labs. Deliverable D.3.1.2 of GridCoord. Retrieved October 2, 2006, from http://www.gridcoord.org/grid/portal/information/public/D.3.1.2_V.1.2_181105.doc.
33. von Hippel, E. (1986). Lead users: A source of novel product concepts. Management Science, 32, 791-805.
34. Voss, A., Mascord, M., Fraser, M., Jirotka, M., Procter, R., & Halfpenny, P.,et al.(2007). e-Research infrastructure development and community engagement. Paper presented at the UK e-Science All Hands Meeting. Retrieved October 31, 2007, from http://www.allhands.org.uk/2007/proceedings/papers/866.pdf.
35. Williams, R., & Edge, D. (1996). The social shaping of technology. Research Policy, 25, 865-899.
36. Woolgar, S. (2003). Social shaping perspectives on e-Science and e-Social Science: The case for research support. A consultative study for the Economic and Social Research Council. Retrieved April 16, 2008, from http://www.sbs.ox.ac.uk/NR/rdonlyres/04164366-448C-49B3-B359-FC55CC4A5BD6/879/ESocialScience.pdf.
37. Wouters, P., & Beaulieu, A. (2006). Imagining e-Science beyond computation. In C. Hine (Ed.), New infrastructure for knowledge production: Understanding e-science (pp. 48-70). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.
38. Wouters, P., & Beaulieu, A. (2007). Critical accountability: Dilemmas for interventionist studies of e-Science. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 583-599.
39. Wuchty, S., Jones, B.F., & Uzzi, B. (2007). The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316, 1036-1039.