Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Social Studies of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hackett, E. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Essential Tensions

Identity, Control, and Risk in Research

Edward J. Hackett

School of Human Evolution and Social Change at Arizona State University, ehackett{at}asu.edu

This paper examines the tensions and paradoxes that arise during the life course of research groups as they strive to establish and maintain an identity, acquire and retain control of an ensemble of research technologies, and evaluate and choose the risks they are willing to accept in their work. My central aim is to rekindle interest in the ambivalences, tensions, and paradoxes of science by identifying and illustrating the tensions that characterize research groups. Among the questions of concern are: How does a group establish an independent identity while remaining connected with its field of research? How are consistency of focus and continuity of approach balanced against the freedom younger scientists need to develop as independent investigators? What varieties of risks are encountered in research and how are they evaluated and navigated? Based on intensive, repeated, face-to-face interviews with scientists at various levels of seniority at elite private and public universities, the paper examines the choices leaders make at these critical junctures and the consequences of those choices. Several sorts of tensions are examined, including autocracy versus democracy, varieties of risk, role conflicts, openness versus secrecy, competitive cooperation, ambivalences about priority claims, and balancing continuity and change, and their implications for science, scientists, and the research process are discussed.

Key Words: accumulative advantage • ambivalence • collaboration • leadership • paradox • research groups

Social Studies of Science, Vol. 35, No. 5, 787-826 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0306312705056045
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Thesis ElevenHome page
D. Rhoten, E. O'Connor, and E. J. Hackett
The Act of Collaborative Creation and the Art of Integrative Creativity: Originality, Disciplinarity and Interdisciplinarity
Thesis Eleven, February 1, 2009; 96(1): 83 - 108.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Social Studies of ScienceHome page
E. Leahey and R. C. Reikowsky
Research Specialization and Collaboration Patterns in Sociology
Social Studies of Science, June 1, 2008; 38(3): 425 - 440.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Socioecon RevHome page
S. P. Vallas and D. L. Kleinman
Contradiction, convergence and the knowledge economy: the confluence of academic and commercial biotechnology
Socioecon. Rev., April 1, 2008; 6(2): 283 - 311.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]