Making Science: New Generations of Collaborative Knowledge Production

American Behavioral Scientist

Volumn 59, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 531-547

  Binz Scharf, Maria C ^a   Kalish, Yuval ^b   Paik, Leslie ^a  

^a CITY COLLEGE OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

big science; databases; ethnography; social network analysis; virtual organization

Indexed keywords

EID: 84926192002     PISSN: 00027642     EISSN: 15523381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0002764214556805     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Barabasi A.-L.,Albert R.Emergence of scaling in random networks.Science. 1999;286:509-512
2. Binz-Scharf M. C.,Lazer D.,Mergel I.Searching for answers.American Review of Public Administration. 2012;41:202-225
3. Birnholtz J. P.When do researchers collaborate.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2007;58:2226-2239
4. Boh W.-F.,Ren Y.,Kiesler S.,Bussjaeger R.Expertise and collaboration in the geographically dispersed organization.Organization Science. 2007;18:595-612
5. Bos N.,Zimmerman A.,Olson J.,Yew J.,Yerkie J.,Dahl E.,Olson G.From shared databases to communities of practice.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2007;12:652-672
6. Bowker G.Biodiversity datadiversity.Social Studies of Science. 2000;30:643-683
7. Cole S.Making science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1992:
8. Cross R.,Borgatti S. P.,Parker A.Beyond answers.Social Networks. 2001;23:201-235
9. Cummings J. N.,Kiesler S.Coordination costs and project outcomes in multi-university collaborations.Research Policy. 2007;36:1620-1634
10. De Sanctis G.,Monge P. R.Communication processes for virtual organizations.Journal of Compter-Mediated Communication. 1998;3 (4):
11. De Solla Price D. J.Little science, big science. New York, NY: Columbia University Press; 1963:
12. Dekker D.,Krackhardt D.,Snijders T. A. B.Sensitivity of MRQAP tests to collinearity and autocorrelation conditions.Psychometrika. 2007;72:563-581
13. Feld S. L.The focused organization of social ties.American Journal of Sociology. 1981;86:1015-1035
14. Furman J. L.,Murray F.,Stern S.More for the research dollar.Nature. 2010;468:757-758
15. Glaser B. G.,Strauss A. L.The discovery of grounded theory. New York, NY: Aldine; 1967:
16. Granovetter M. S.Strength of weak ties.American Journal of Sociology. 1973;78:1360-1380
17. Hacking I.The social construction of what?. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1999:
18. Hansen M. T.The search-transfer problem.Administrative Science Quarterly. 1999;44:82-111
19. HarzingA. W. (2007). Publish or perish. Retrieved from http://www.harzing.com/pop.htm
20. Hinds P. J.,Bailey D. E.Out of sight, out of sync.Organization Science. 2003;14:615-632
21. Distributed work. Hinds P. J.Kiesler S., ed. Cambridge: MIT Press; 2002:
22. Hine C.Databases as scientific instruments and their role in the ordering of scientific work.Social Studies of Science. 2006;36:269-298
23. Hirsch J. E.An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2005;102:16569-16572
24. Jarvenpaa S. L.,Leidner D. E.Communication and trust in global virtual teams.Organization Science. 1999;10:791-815
25. States of knowledge. Jasanoff S., ed. New York, NY: Routledge; 2004:
26. Jones B. F.,Wuchty S.,Uzzi B.Multi-university research teams.Science. 2008;322:1259-1262
27. Kalish Y.SIOP new frontiers series: Methods. Landis R.Cortina J., ed. Bowling Green, OH: American Psychological Association; 2013:99-136.
28. Kalish Y.,Luria G.Exponential random graph models for social networks. Lusher D.Koskinen J.Robins G., ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2012:226-236.
29. Kim K.-J.,Bonk C. J.Cross-cultural comparisons of online collaboration.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2002;8 (1):
30. Knorr-Cetina K.Epistemic cultures. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1999:
31. Krackhardt D.QAP partialling as a test of spuriousness.Social Networks. 1987;9:171-186
32. Krackhardt D.Predicting with networks.Social Networks. 1988;10:359-381
33. Krackhardt D.,Hanson J.Informal networks.Harvard Business Review. 1993;71:104-111
34. Latour B.,Woolgar S.Laboratory life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1979:
35. Lenoir T.Shaping biomedicine as an information science.Conference on the history and heritage of science information systems; 1998Medford, NJ: Information Today; 1998. 27.
36. Lynch M.Art and artifact in laboratory science. London, England: Routledge; 1985:
37. Lynch M.Scientific practice and ordinary action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 1993:
38. Maznevski M. L.,Chudoba K. M.Bridging space over time.Organization Science. 2000;11:473-492
39. McPherson M.,Smith-Lovin L.,Cook J. M.Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks.Annual Review of Sociology. 2001;27:415-444
40. Merton R. K.The Matthew effect in science.Science. 1968;159:56-63
41. Nelson M. W.,Bloomfield R.,Hales J. W.,Libby R.The effect of information strength and weight on behavior in financial markets.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2001;86:168-196
42. Nielsen M.Reinventing discovery. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2012:
43. Okhuysen G. A.,Bechky B. A.Coordination in organizations.Academy of Management Annals. 2009;3:463-502
44. Olson G. M.,Olson J. S.Distance matters.Human-Computer Interaction. 2000;15:139-178
45. Orlikowski W. J.Knowing in practice.Organization Science. 2002;13:249-273
46. Pickering A.Science as practice and culture. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1992:
47. Powell A.,Piccoli G.,Ives B.Virtual teams.The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems. 2004;35 (1): 6-36
48. Shanghai University. (2012). Academic ranking of world universities. Retrieved from http://www.shanghairanking.com/
49. Shapin S.Here and everywhere: Sociology of scientific knowledge.Annual Review of Sociology. 1995;21:289-321
50. Weiss R. S.Learning from strangers. New York, NY: Free Press; 1994:
51. Wuchty S.,Jones B. F.,Uzzi B.The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge.Science. 2007;316:1036-1039