Introduction: Fields of knowledge and theory traditions in the sociology of science

Political Power and Social Theory

Volumn 27, Issue , 2014, Pages 1-30

  Hess, David J ^a   Frickel, Scott ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904818075     PISSN: 01988719     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1108/S0198-871920140000027001     Document Type: Review

References (76)

1. Barnes, B., & Dolby, R. G. A. (1970). The scientific ethos: A deviant viewpoint. Archives Européenes de Sociologie, 11, 3-25.
2. Berman, E. P. (2012). Creating the market university: How academic science became an economic engine. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3. Bloor, D. (1991). Knowledge and social imagery (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
4. Bloor, D. (1999). Anti-Latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 30(1), 81-112.
5. Bourdieu P. (1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Scientific Information. 14 (6), 19-47
6. Bourdieu, P. (1981). The political ontology of Martin Heidegger. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
7. Bourdieu, P. (1990). Animadversiones in mertonem. In J. Clark, C. Modgil, & S. Midgil (Eds.), Robert Merton: Consensus and controversy (pp. 297-301). New York, NY: Falmer Press.
8. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Science of science and reflexivity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
9. Bourdieu, P. (2005). The social structures of the economy. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
10. Callon, M. (2007). What does it mean to say that economics is performative? In D. MacKenzie, F. Muniesa, & L. Siu (Eds.), Do economists make markets? On the performativity of economics (pp. 311-357). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11. Camic, C. ( 1990). An historical prologue to ?Prolegomena to a theory of social institutions,' by Talcott Parsons. American Sociological Review, 55(3), 313-319.
12. Camic, C. (2011). Bourdieu's cleft sociology of science. Minerva, 49, 275-293.
13. Collins, H. (1983). An empirical relativist programme in the sociology of scientific knowledge. In K. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed (pp. 85-113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Collins, H., & Evans, P. (2007). Rethinking expertise. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15. Daniels, G. (1967). The pure-science ideal and democratic culture. Science, 156, 1699-1705.
16. Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2011). Toward a general theory of strategic action fields. Sociological Theory, 29, 1-26.
17. Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012). A theory of fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18. Foucault, M. (1970). The order of things. New York, NY: Vintage.
19. Foucault, M. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
20. Frickel, S., & Moore, K. (Eds.). (2006). The new political sociology of science: Institutions, networks, power. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.
21. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books.
22. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23. Gieryn, T. (2006). Review of science of science and reflexivity. Contemporary Sociology, 35, 185-187.
24. Gilbert, N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Hagstrom, W. ( 1965). The scientific community. New York, NY: Basic Books.
26. Haraway D. (1989). Primate visions. New York, NY: Routledge.
27. Harding, S. (1998). Is science multicultural? Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
28. Hess, D. J. (1995). Science and technology in a multicultural world. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
29. Hess, D. J. (1997). Science studies: An advanced introduction. New York, NY: NYU Press.
30. Hess, D. J. (2011). Conference on the political sociology of science and technology studies. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Retrieved from http://www.davidjhess.org/PSST Conference.pdf
31. Hess, D. J. (2013). Neoliberalism and the history of STS theory: Toward a reflexive sociology. Social Epistemology, 27(2), 177-193.
32. Hess, D. J. (2014). Political ideology and the green-energy transition in the United States. In D. Kleinman & K. Moore (Eds.), Routledge handbook of science and technology studies. New York, NY: Routledge.
33. Hessen, B. ( 1971). The social and economic roots of Newton's Principia. New York, NY: Howard Fertig.
34. Jasanoff, S. (1990). The fifth branch: Science advisors as policy makers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. J asanoff, S. (2004). Designs on nature: Science and democracy in Europe and the United States. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36. Jones, M. (2009). The rules of the game: Entrepreneurial science. Social Studies of Science, 39(6), 821-851.
37. Kinchy, A. (2012). Seeds, science, and struggle: The global politics of transgenic crops. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Kleinman, D. (2003). Impure cultures: University biology at the millennium. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
39. Kleinman, D., & Vallas, S. (2001). Science, capitalism, and the rise of the ?knowledge worker': The changing structure of knowledge production in the United States. Theory and Society, 30(4), 451-492.
40. Knorr, K. (1977). Producing and reproducing knowledge: Descriptive or constructive? Social Science Information, 16(6), 669-698.
41. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge. New York, NY: Pergamon.
42. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1983). The ethnographic study of scientific work: Towards a constructivist interpretation of science. In K. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed: Perspectives in the social study of science (pp. 115 -140). London: Sage.
43. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
44. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
45. Latour, B. (1988). The pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
46. Latour, B. (1990). Postmodern? No, simply amodern! Steps toward an anthropology of science. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 21(1), 145-171.
47. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48. Lave R. (2012). Fields and Streams: Stream Restoration, Neoliberalism, and the Future of Environmental Science. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
49. Le ́vi-Strauss, C. (1963). Totemism. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
50. MacKenzie, D. (1981). Interests, positivism, and history. Social Studies of Science, 11(4), 498-501.
51. MacKenzie, D. (1983). Statistics in Britain. Edinburgh, UK: University of Edinburgh Press.
52. MacKenzie, D. (1984). Reply to Yearley. Studies in the History and Philosophy, 15(3), 251-259.
53. MacKenzie, D., & Barnes, B. (1979). Scientific judgment: The Biometry-Mendelism controversy. In B. Barnes & S. Shapin (Eds.), Natural order (pp. 191-210). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
54. Martin, E. (1994). Flexible bo dies. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
55. Marx, K. (1992). Capital: A critique of political economy (Vol. 2). London: Penguin Books.
56. McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1973). The trend of social movements in America: Professionalization and resource mobilization. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
57. Merton, R. (1957). Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review, 22(6), 635-659.
58. Merton, R. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
59. Mialet, H. (2003). The ?Righteous Wrath' of Pierre Bourdieu. Social Studies of Science, 33(4), 613-621.
60. Mirowski, P., & Nik-Khah, E. (2007). Markets made flesh: Performativity, and a problem in science studies, augmented with consideration of FCC auctions. In D. MacKenzie, F. Muniesa, & L. Siu (Eds.), Do economics make markets? On the performativity of economics (pp. 190-224). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
61. Mitroff, I. I. (1974). Norms and counternorms in a select group of Apollo Moon scientists: A case study of the ambivalence of scientists. American Sociological Review, 39, 579-595.
62. Moore, K., Kleinman, D. L., Hess, D., & Frickel, S. (2011). Science and neoliberal globalization: A political sociological approach. Theory and Society, 40(5), 505-532.
63. Mulkay, M. (1976). Norms and ideology in science. Social Science Information, 15(4/5), 637-656.
64. Mulkay, M., & Gilbert, N. (1982). Accounting for error: How scientists construct their social world when they acc ount for correct and incorrect belief. Sociology, 16(2), 165-183.
65. Parsons, T. (1954). Essays in sociological theory. New York, NY: Free Press.
66. Parsons, T. (1990). Prolegomena to a theory of social institutions. American Sociological Review, 55(3), 319-333.
67. Rapp, R. (2000). Testing women, testing the fetus: The social impact of amniocentesis in America. New York, NY: Routledge.
68. Sahlins, M. (1976). Culture and practical reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
69. Sismondo S. (2005). Review of science of science and reflexivity. Canadian Journal of Sociology (Online). Retrieved from http://www.cjsonline.ca/ pdf/sciofsci.pdf. March-April 1-2
70. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
71. Suryanarayanan, S., & Kleinman, D. L. (2013). Be(e) coming experts: The controversy over insecticides in the honey bee colony collapse disorder. Social Studies of Science, 43(2), 215-240.
72. Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
73. Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
74. Woolgar, S. (1981). Interests and explanation in the social study of science. Social Studies of Science, 11(3), 365-394.
75. Wynne, B. (1996). Misunderstood misunderstandings: Social identities and public uptake of science. In A. Irwin & B. Wynne (Eds.), Misunderstanding sci ence? The public reconstruction of science and technology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
76. Yearley, S. (2005). Making sense of science: Understanding the social study of science. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.