IMAGE OF SCIENCE: Astrophysicist Replaces Supercomputer with Eight PlayStation 3s

Here in the US, we have collectively decided long ago to present the disciplinary work of science as a universalistic methodological apparatus -- packaged in such images as the scientific method, fair tests, experiments. Given that there is no disciplinary unity in method, the gap between the contemporary practice of science and science education continues to expand. This is especially true as we ratchet down to increasingly narrow educational outcomes -- still hopelessly focused on content. Here's a nice image of what the 'practical work' of contemporary science looks like -- it is one of persistent tinkering, customization, finagling of resources, and innovation... more»

HANDBOOK: The New Handbook of Science and Technology Studies

Science and Technology Studies is a flourishing interdisciplinary field that examines the creation, development, and consequences of science and technology in their cultural, historical, and social contexts. The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies provides a comprehensive and authoritative overview of the field, reviewing current research and major theoretical and methodological approaches and analyzing emergent issues in a form that is accessible to new and established scholars from a range of disciplines. more» more» table of contents»

STUDY: Ten Myths of Scientific Collaboration

From this book, here are 10 myths of scientific collaboration...

Big Myths...

• ICTs improve collaboration
  
• Larger collaborations are more rigid & hierarchical (No -- on matters pertaining to the generation of scientific research, they are not. Size is less significant than we suspected.)
  
• Outcomes of a collaboration determine success.
  
• Collaborations are based on Trust. (Trust has no influence on outcomes.)
  

Other Myths...

• Co-authorship tells us important things about collaboration
  
• We can learn from high energy physics. (Not typical - Physics is only typical of high-energy physics. Not a model.)
  
• Collaboration is a necessity
  
• Collaborations are formed by people who know each other.
  
• Collaborations benefit everyone (e.g., Matthew effect).
  
• Benefits of collaboration are greater than the costs. (Believe it -- but it isn’t true.)
  

BOOK: Structures of Scientific Collaboration

"Collaboration among organizations is rapidly becoming common in scientific research as globalization and new communication technologies make it possible for researchers from different locations and institutions to work together on common projects. These scientific and technological collaborations are part of a general trend toward more fluid, flexible, and temporary organizational arrangements, but they have received very limited scholarly attention..." more»

The authors find that collaborative research depends on both technology and bureaucracy; scientists claim to abhor bureaucracy, but most collaborations use it constructively to achieve their goals. The book analyzes the structural elements of collaboration (among them formation, size and duration, organization, technological practices, and participant experiences) and the relationships among them. The authors find that trust, though viewed as positive, is not necessarily associated with successful projects; indeed, the formal structures of bureaucracy reduce the need for high levels of trust--and make possible the independence so valued by participating scientists.

CLASSIC: Certainty and the Public Understanding of Science: Science on Television

In this paper, Collins shows us how mainstream science documentaries systematically avoid revealing the 'window of uncertainty' that is a cornerstone of the epistemic practice of science. It is little wonder that the images of science held by the public are at odds with the practical dimensions of actual scientific work... more»

QUOTE: Richard Feynman on Philosophy of Science & Science

"Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds." - Attributed to Richard Feynman

ARTICLE: The new science of sharing

Open collaboration on a mass scale might just transform scientific inquiry and progress in many fields... more»

As large-scale scientific collaborations become the norm, scientists will rely increasingly on distributed methods of collecting data, verifying discoveries, and testing hypotheses not only to speed things up but to improve the veracity of scientific knowledge itself. For example, rapid, iterative, and open-access publishing will engage a much greater proportion of the scientific community in the peer-review process. Conventional paper-based scientific journals, meanwhile, will be augmented by dynamic publishing tools such as blogs, wikis, Web-enabled RSS feeds, and podcasts that turn scientific publications into living documents. Projects such as MIT's OpenWetWare are already doing this.

OPINION: The ups and downs of 'team science'

"Traditional scientific research rewards the rugged individualist, who often triumphs by beating someone else... Collaborative research, on the other hand, requires a willingness to share credit." more»

OPINION: Science Studies is Anthropology

A bit of boundary work attempting to equate Latour's pragmatist bent with the field of anthropology... more»