Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

Governing Science: How Science Policy Shapes Research Content

  • Jochen Gläser (a1) and Grit Laudel (a2)
Abstract
Abstract

This review explores contributions by science policy studies and the sociology of science to our understanding of the impact of governance on research content. Contributions are subsumed under two perspectives, namely an “impact of”—perspective that searches for effects of specific governance arrangements and an “impact on”—perspective that asks what factors contribute to the construction of research content and includes governance among them. Our review shows that little is known so far about the impact of governance on knowledge content. A research agenda does not necessarily need to include additional empirical phenomena but must address the macro-micro-macro link inherent to the question in its full complexity, and systematically exploit comparative approaches in order to establish causality. This requires interdisciplinary collaboration between science policy studies, the sociology of science, and bibliometrics, which all can contribute to the necessary analytical toolbox.

Résumé

Cet article explore les apports de deux domaines – les étude de politique des sciences et la sociologie des sciences – pour la compréhension de l’impact de la gouvernance sur le contenu de la connaissance scientifique. Ces apports sont regroupés dans deux perspectives principales, d’une part celle dite de l’« impact de » qui cherche à identifier les effets spécifiques des dispositifs de gouvernance, d’autre part celle dite de l’« impact sur » qui s’interroge sur les facteurs qui façonnent le contenu et qui inclue la gouvernance comme l’un de ces facteurs. Les auteurs montrent que l’on dispose au final que de peu de connaissances sur l’impact de la gouvernance sur le contenu de la science. Un agenda de recherche ne doit pas servir nécessairement à produire davantage de matériau empirique mais avant tout à saisir, dans toute sa complexité, le lien macro-micro-macro inhérent à cette question, tout en exploitant de façon systématique les approches comparées pour au final établir la causalité. Cela suppose l’élaboration d’une nouvelle « boîte à outils » analytique, fruit d’une collaboration interdisciplinaire à laquelle peuvent contribuer utilement les études de politique scientifique, la sociologie des sciences et l’approche bibliométrique.

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Review analysiert Beiträge der politikwissenschaftlichen und soziologischen Wissenschaftsforschung zu der Frage, wie Governance Forschungsinhalte beeinflusst. Wir gruppieren die Beiträge unter zwei Perspektiven, und zwar einer ‚Einfluss von‘ – Perspektive, die nach Effekten spezifischer Governance-Arrangements sucht, und einer ‚Einfluss auf‘ – Perspektive, die nach Einflüssen auf die Konstruktion wissenschaftlichen Wissens fragt und Governance als einen solchen Einfluss einschließt. Unser Review verdeutlicht, wie gering unsere gegenwärtiges Wissen über den Einfluss von Governance auf Forschungsinhalte noch ist. Eine Forschungsagenda muss nicht unbedingt zusätzliche empirische Phänomene einschließen. Sie muss aber die der Frage inhärente Makro-Mikro-Makro – Struktur in ihrer vollen Komplexität adressieren und systematisch vergleichende Ansätze für die Etablierung von Kausalität ausnutzen. Das erfordert interdisziplinäre Kooperation zwischen der politikwissenschaftlichen und soziologischen Wissenschaftsforschung sowie der Bibliometrie, da alle drei Gebiete zum nötigen analytischen Werkzeugkasten beitragen können.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Governing Science
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Governing Science
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Governing Science
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Kaare Aagaard , 2015. How Incentives Trickle down: Local Use of a National Bibliometric Indicator System, Science and Public Policy, 42: 725-737.

Kaare Aagaard , Cater Bloch and Jesper W. Schneider , 2015. Impacts of performance-based research funding systems: The case of the Norwegian Publication Indicator. Research Evaluation, 24: 106-117.

Gina Anderson , 2008. Mapping Academic Resistance in the Managerial University. Organization, 15 (2): 251-270.

Otto Auranen and Mika Nieminen , 2010. University Research Funding and Publication Performance—An International Comparison, Research Policy, 39 (6): 822-834.

Nicola Baldini , 2008. Negative Effects of University Patenting: Myths and Grounded Evidence, Scientometrics, 75 (2): 289-311.

Teresa R. Behrens and Denis O. Gray , 2001. Unintended Consequences of Cooperative Research: Impact of Industry Sponsorship on Climate for Academic Freedom and Other Graduate Student Outcome, Research Policy 30 (2): 179-199.

Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent , 2016. “Building Multidisciplinary Research Fields: The Cases of Materials Science, Nanotechnology and Synthetic Biology”, in M. Merz and Ph. Sormani , eds., The Local Configuration of New Research Fields (Dordrecht, Springer International Publishing: 45-60).

Alexander Berezin , 1998. “The Perils of Centralized Research Funding System”, Knowledge, Technology & Policy 11 (3): 5-26.

Elizabeth Popp Berman , 2014. “Not Just Neoliberalism: Economization in US Science and Technology Policy”, Science, Technology & Human Values 39 (3): 397-431.

Samyukta Bhupatiraju , Önder Nomaler , Giorgio Triulzi and Bart Verspagen , 2012. “Knowledge Flows––Analyzing the Core Literature of Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Science and Technology Studies, Research Policy, 41 (7): 1205-1218.

Carter Bloch , EbbeKrogh Graversen and HeidiSkovgaard Pedersen , 2014. “Competitive Research Grants and Their Impact on Career Performance”, Minerva, 52 (1): 77-96.

David Blumenthal , Eric G. Campbell , Nancyanne Causino and Karen Louis Seashor , 1996. “Participation of Life-Science Faculty in Research Relationships with Industry”, The New England Journal of Medicine, 335 (23): 1734-1739.

Susan Böhmer and Markus von Ins , 2009. Different––not Just by Label: Research-Oriented Academic Careers in Germany, Research Evaluation, 18 (3): 177-184.

Lutz Bornmann , Gerlind Wallon and Anna Ledin , 2008. “Does the Committee Peer Review Select the Best Applicants for Funding? An Investigation of the Selection Process for Two European Molecular Biology Organization Programmes”, PLoS ONE, 3 (10): e3480.

Dietmar Braun , 1998. The Role of Funding Agencies In The Cognitive Development Of Science, Research Policy, 27 (8): 807-821.

Dietmar Braun and David H. Guston , 2003. Principal-Agent Theory and Research Policy: An Introduction, Science and Public Policy 30 (5): 302-308.

Mark B Brown ., 2015. Politicizing Science: Conceptions of Politics in Science and Technology Studies, Social Studies of Science 45 (1): 3-30.

Phil Brown , Sabrina McCormick , Brian Mayer , Stephen Zavestoski , Rachel Morello-Frosch , Rebecca Gasior Altman and Laura Senier , 2006. “‘A Lab of Our Own’: Environmental Causation of Breast Cancer and Challenges to the Dominant Epidemiological Paradigm”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 31 (5): 499-536.

Linda Butler , 2003. Explaining Australia’s Increased Share of ISI Publications––The Effects of a Funding Formula Based on Publication Counts, Research Policy, 32: 143-155.

David Campbell , Michelle Picard-Aitken , Grégoire Côté , Julie Caruso , Rodolfo Valentim , Stuart Edmonds , Gregory T. Williams , Benoît Macaluso , Jean-Pierre Robitaille , Nicolas Bastien , Marie-Claude Laframboise , Louis-Michel Lebeau , Philippe Mirabel , Vincent Larivière and Éric Archambault , 2010. Bibliometrics as a Performance Measurement Tool for Research Evaluation: The Case of Research Funded by the National Cancer Institute of Canada, American Journal of Evaluation, 31 (1): 66-83.

Eric G. Campbell , Joel S. Weissman , Nancyanne Causino and David Blumenthal , 2000. “Data Withholding in Academic Medicine: Characteristics of Faculty Denied Access to Research Results and Biomaterials”, Research Policy, 29: 303-312.

Giliberto Capano , 2011. “Government Continues to Do its Job. A Comparative Study of Governance Shifts in the Higher Education Sector”, Public Administration, 89 (4): 1622-1642.

C Caswill ., 2003. Principals, Agents and Contracts, Science and Public Policy, 30 (5): 337-346.

Wesley M. Cohen , Richard R. Nelson and John P. Walsh , 2002. “Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D”, Management Science 48 (1): 1-23.

Stephen Cole , Jonathan R. Cole and Gary A. Simon , 1981. “Chance and Consensus in Peer Review”, Science, 214 (4523): 881-886.

Mark H Cooper ., 2009. “Commercialization of the University and Problem Choice by Academic Biological Scientists”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 34 (5): 629-653.

Benjamin Coriat and Fabienne Orsi , 2002. “Establishing a New Intellectual Property Rights Regime in the United States: Origins, Content and Problems”, Research Policy, 31 (8-9): 1491-1507.

Pablo D’Este and Markus Perkmann , 2011. “Why Do Academics Engage with Industry? The Entrepreneurial University and Individual Motivations”, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 36 (3): 316-339.

Harry De Boer , Jürgen Enders and Liudvika Leišytė , 2007. “Public Sector Reform in Dutch Higher Education: The Organizational Transformation of the University”, Public Administration, 85 (1): 27-46.

Lynn Dirk , 1999. “A Measure of Originality: The Elements of Science”, Social Studies of Science, 29 (5): 765-776.

Matthew N Eisler ., 2013. “‘The Ennobling Unity of Science and Technology’: Materials Sciences and Engineering, the Department of Energy, and the Nanotechnology Enigma”, Minerva, 51 (2): 225-251.

Steven Epstein , 1996. Impure Science: AIDS, Activism, and the Politics of Knowledge (Berkeley, University of California Press).

James A Evans ., 2010a. Industry Collaboration, Scientific Sharing, and the Dissemination of Knowledge, Social Studies of Science, 40 (5): 757-791.

James A Evans ., 2010b. “Industry Induces Academic Science to Know Less about More”, American Journal of Sociology 116 (2): 389-452.

Chiara Franzoni , Giuseppe Scellato and Paula Stephan , 2011. “Changing Incentives to Publish”, Science 333 (6043): 702-703.

Scott Frickel , 2014a. “Absences: Methodological Note about Nothing, in Particular”, Social Epistemology, 28 (1): 86-95.

Scott Frickel , Sahra Gibbon , Jeff Howard , Joanna Kempner , Gwen Ottinger and David J. Hess , 2010. “Undone Science: Charting Social Movement and Civil Society Challenges to Research Agenda Setting”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 35 (4): 444-473.

Joan Fujimura , 1987. “Constructing ‘Do-able’ problems in cancer research: articulating alignment”, Social Studies of Science, 17: 257-293.

Jeffrey L. Furman , Fiona Murray and Scott Stern , 2012. “Growing Stem Cells: The Impact of Federal Funding Policy on the US Scientific Frontier”, Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 31 (3): 661-705.

Monica Gaughan and Barry Bozeman , 2002. “Using Curriculum Vitae to Compare Some Impacts of NSF Research Grants with Research Center Funding”, Research Evaluation, 11 (1): 17-26.

Jochen Gläser , Stefan Lange , Grit Laudel and Uwe Schimank , 2010. “The Limits of Universality: How Field-Specific Epistemic Conditions affect Authority Relations and their Consequences”, in R. Whitley , J. Gläser and L. Engwall , eds., Reconfiguring Knowledge Production: Changing Authority Relationships in the Sciences and Their Consequences for Intellectual Innovation (Oxford, Oxford University Press: 291-324).

Jochen Gläser and Grit Laudel , 2007. “Evaluation without Evaluators: The Impact of Funding Formulae on Australian University Research”, in Richard Whitley and Jochen Gläser , eds., The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems (Dordrecht, Springer, 127-151).

Jochen Gläser and Grit Laudel , 2015b. “Cold Atom Gases, Hedgehogs, and Snakes: The Methodological Challenges of Comparing Scientific Things”, Nature and Culture, 10 (3): 303-332.

Jochen Gläser , Grit Laudel and Eric Lettkemann , 2016. Hidden in Plain Sight: The Impact of Generic Governance on the Emergence of Research Fields. In Martina Merz and Philippe Sormani , eds., The Local Configuration of New Research Fields (Dordrecht, Springer International Publishing: 25-43).

Matthias Gross , 2007. “The Unknown in Process: Dynamic Connections of Ignorance, Non-Knowledge and Related Concepts”, Current Sociology, 55 (5): 742-759.

Joshua Guetzkow and Michèle Lamont , 2004. “What is Originality in the Humanities and the Social Sciences?”, American Sociological Review, 69 (2).

David H Guston ., 2001. “Boundary Organizations in Environmental Policy and Science: An Introduction”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 26 (4): 399-408.

Edward J Hackett ., 2005. “Essential Tensions: Identity, Control, and Risk in Research”, Social Studies of Science, 35 (5): 787-826.

Carolin Haeussler , 2011. “Information-Sharing in Academia and the Industry: A Comparative Study”, Research Policy, 40 (1): 105-122.

Björn Hammarfelt and Sarah de Rijcke , 2015. “Accountability in Context: Effects of Research Evaluation Systems on Publication Practices, Disciplinary Norms, and Individual Working Routines in The Faculty of Arts at Uppsala University”, Research Evaluation, 24: 63-77.

Adam M Hedgecoe ., 2003. “Terminology and the Construction of Scientific Disciplines: The Case of Pharmacogenomics”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 28 (4): 513-537.

Thomas Heinze , 2008. “How to Sponsor Ground-Breaking Research: A Comparison of Funding Schemes”, Science and Public Policy, 35 (5): 802-818.

Thomas Heinze , Philip Shapira , Juan D. Rogers and Jacqueline M. Senker , 2009. “Organizational and institutional influences on creativity in scientific research”, Research Policy, 38: 610-623.

Thomas Heinze , Philip Shapira , Jacqueline Senker and Stefan Kuhlmann , 2007. “Identifying creative research accomplishments: Methodology and results for nanotechnology and human genetics”, Scientometrics, 70 (1): 125-152.

Mary Henkel , 2005. “Academic Identity and Autonomy in a Changing Policy Environment”, Higher Education, 49: 155-176.

Laurens K. Hessels , John Grin and Ruud E. H. M. Smits , 2011. “The Effects of a Changing Institutional Environment on Academic Research Practices: Three Cases from Agricultural Science”, Science and Public Policy, 38 (7): 555-568.

Diana Hicks , 2012. “Performance-Based University Research Funding Systems”, Research Policy, 41: 251-261.

Götz Hoeppe , 2014. “Working Data Together: The Accountability and Reflexivity of Digital Astronomical Practice”, Social Studies of Science, 44 (2): 243-270.

David F Horrobin ., 1996. Peer Review of Grant Applications: A Harbinger for Mediocrity in Clinical Research?, Lancet, 348 (9037): 1293-1295.

Katri Huutoniemi , 2012. Communicating and Compromising on Disciplinary Expertise in the Peer Review of Research Proposals, Social Studies of Science, 42 (6): 897-921.

Peter Ingwersen and Birger Larsen , 2014. “Influence of a Performance Indicator on Danish Research Production and Citation Impact”, 2000-12, Scientometrics, 101: 1325-1344.

Brian Jacob and Lars Lefgren , 2011. “The Impact of nih Postdoctoral Training Grants on Scientific Productivity”, Research Policy, 40 (6): 864-874.

John E Jankowski ., 1999. Trends in Academic Research Spending, Alliances, and Commercialization. The Journal of Technology Transfer 24 (1): 55-68.

Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras , Félix De Moya Anegón and Emilio Delgado López-Cózar , 2003. “The Evolution of Research Activity in Spain—The Impact of The National Commission for the Evaluation of Research Activity (cneai)”, Research Policy, 32 (1): 123-142.

Matthew Kearnes and Matthias Wienroth , 2011. “Tools of the Trade: UK Research Intermediaries and the Politics of Impacts”, Minerva, 49 (2): 153-174.

Daniel Lee Kleinman , 1998. “Untangling Context: Understanding a University Laboratory in the Commercial World”, Science, Technology, & Human Values 23 (3): 285-314.

Daniel Lee Kleinman and Sainath Suryanarayanan , 2013. “Dying Bees and the Social Production of Ignorance”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 38 (4): 492-517.

Daniel Lee Kleinman and Steven P. Vallas , 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.

Karin Knorr-Cetina , 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science (Oxford, Pergamon Press).

Karin Knorr-Cetina , 1982. “Scientific Communities or Transepistemic Arenas of Research? A Critique of Quasi-Economic Models of Science”, Social Studies of Science, 12: 101-130.

Karin Knorr-Cetina , 1995a. “How Superorganisms Change: Consensus Formation and the Social Ontology of High-Energy Physics Experiments”, Social Studies of Science, 25 (1): 119-147.

Karin Knorr-Cetina , 1995b. Laboratory Studies. The Cultural Approach to the Study of Science”, in S. Jasanoff , G. E. Markle , J. C. Petersen and T. Pinch , eds., Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (London, SAGE: 140-166).

Konstantinos Koumpis and Keith Pavitt , 1999. “Corporate Activities in Speech Recognition and Natural Language: Another ‘New Science’-Based Technology”, International Journal of Innovation Management 3 (3): 335-366.

Kristian Kreiner and Maiken Schultz , 1993. “Informal Collaboration in Research-and-Development: The Formation of Networks across Organizations”, Organization Studies, 14 (2): 189-209.

Sheldon Krimsky , 2013. Do Financial Conflicts of Interest Bias Research?: An Inquiry into the “Funding Effect” Hypothesis, Science, Technology & Human Values, 38 (4): 566-587.

Alice Lam , 2010. “From ‘Ivory Tower Traditionalists’ to ‘Entrepreneurial Scientists?’”, Social Studies of Science, 40 (2): 307-340.

Michèle Lamont , 2009. How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgment (Harvard, Harvard University).

Stefan Lange , 2007. “The Basic State of Research in Germany: Conditions of Knowledge Production Pre-Evaluation”, in Richard Whitley and Jochen Gläser (eds.), The Changing Gouvernance of the Sciences, (Dordrecht, Springer, 153-170).

Liv Langfeldt , 2001. “The Decision-Making Constraints and Processes of Grant Peer Review, and their Effects on the Review Outcome”, Social Studies of Science, 31 (6): 820-841.

Liv Langfeldt , Mats Benner , Gunnar Sivertsen , Ernst H. Kristiansen , Dag W. Aksnes , Siri Brorstad Borlaug , Hanne Foss Hansen , Egil Kallerud and Antti Pelkonen , 2015. “Excellence and Growth Dynamics: A Comparative Study of The Matthew Effect”, Science and Public Policy, 42 (5): 661-675.

Grit Laudel , 2006. “The Art of Getting Funded: How Scientists Adapt to their Funding Conditions”, Science and Public Policy, 33 (7): 489-504.

Grit Laudel and Jochen Gläser , 2014. Beyond Breakthrough Research: Epistemic Properties of Research and their Consequences for Research Funding, Research Policy, 43 (7): 1204-1216.

Liudvika Leišytė , Jürgen Enders and Harry De Boer , 2010. “Mediating Problem Choice: Academic Researchers’ Responses to Changes in their Institutional Environment”, in R. Whitley , J. Gläser and L. Engwall , eds), Reconfiguring knowledge production : changing authority relationships in the sciences and their consequences for intellectual innovation (Oxford, Oxford University Press266-290).

Benedetto Lepori , Peter van den Besselaar , Michael Dinges , Bianca Potí , Emanuela Reale , Stig Slipersæter , Jean Thèves and Barend van der Meulen , 2007. “Comparing the Evolution of National Research Policies: What Patterns of Change?”, Science and Public Policy, 34 (6): 372-388.

Josh Lerner and Jean Tirole , 2000. The Simple Economics of Open Source (Cambridge, National Bureau of Economic Research).

Grant Lewison , 1999. The definition and calibration of biomedical subfields. Scientometrics 46 (3): 529-537.

Loet Leydesdorff , 1989. The Relations between Qualitative Theory and Scientometric Methods in Science and Technology Studies: Introduction to the Topical Issue, Scientometrics, 15 (5-6): 333-347.

Loet Leydesdorff and Élaine Gauthier , 1996. The Evaluation of National Performance in Selected Priority Areas Using Scientometric Methods, Research Policy, 25 (3): 431-450.

Marcela Linkova , 2014. “Unable to Resist: Researchers’ Responses to Research Assessment in the Czech Republic”, Human Affairs, 24 (1): 78-88.

Severine Louvel , 2010. “Changing Authority Relations within French Academic Research Units since the 1960s: From Patronage to Partnership”, in R. Whitley , J. Gläser and L. Engwall , eds., Reconfiguring Knowledge Production (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 184-210).

Terttu Luukkonen , 2012. Conservatism and Risk-Taking in Peer Review: Emerging Erc Practices, Research Evaluation, 21 (1): 48-60.

Surya Mahdi and Keith Pavitt , 1997. “Key National Factors in the Emergence of Computational Chemistry Firms”, International Journal of Innovation Management, 1 (4): 355-386.

Anne Marcovich and Terry Shinn , 2014. Toward a New Dimension: Exploring the Nanoscale (Oxford, Oxford University Press).

Ben R Martin ., 2012. “The Evolution of Science Policy and Innovation Studies”, Research Policy, 41 (7): 1219-1239.

Ben R. Martin , Paul Nightingale and Alfredo Yegros-Yegros , 2012. “Science and Technology Studies: Exploring the Knowledge Base”, Research Policy, 41 (7): 1182-1204.

V. Lynn Meek , 1991. The Transformation of Australian Higher Education from Binary to Unitary System, Higher Education, 21 (4): 461-494.

Frank Meier and Uwe Schimank , 2010. “Mission Now Possible: Profile Building and Leadership in German Universities”, in R. Richard Whitley , J. Gläser and L. Engwall , eds., Reconfiguring Knowledge Production: Changing Authority Relationships in the Sciences and their Consequences for Intellectual Innovation (Oxford, Oxford University Press: 211-236).

Martina Merz and Peter Biniok , 2010. “How Technological Platforms Reconfigure Science-Industry Relations: The Case of Micro- and Nanotechnology”, Minerva, 48 (2): 105-124.

Frieder Meyer-Krahmer and Ulrich Schmoch , 1998. “Science-based technologies: university-industry interactions in four fields”, Research Policy, 27 (8): 835-851.

Thaddeus R. Miller and Mark W. Neff , 2013. De-Facto Science Policy in the Making: How Scientists Shape Science Policy and Why it Matters (or, Why STS and STP Scholars Should Socialize), Minerva, 51 (3): 295-315.

Susan Molyneux-Hodgson and Morgan Meyer , 2009. Tales of Emergence—“Synthetic Biology as a Scientific Community in the Making, BioSocieties, 4 (2-3): 129-145.

Norma Morris , 2000. “Science Policy in Action: Policy and The Researcher”, Minerva, 38 (4): 425-451.

Norma Morris , 2002. “The developing role of departments”, Research Policy, 31 (5): 817-833.

Norma Morris , 2003. “Academic Researchers as ‘agents’ of science policy”, Science and Public Policy, 30 (5): 359-370.

Fiona Murray and Scott Stern , 2007. “Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge?: An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 63 (4): 648-687.

Christine Musselin , 2013. “How Peer Review Empowers the Academic Profession and University Managers: Changes in Relationships between the State, Universities and The Professoriate”, Research Policy, 42 (5): 1165-1173.

Jörg Neufeld and Stefan Hornbostel , 2012. “Funding programmes for young scientists––Do the ‘best’ apply?”, Research Evaluation, 21 (3): 1-10.

Jörg Neufeld , Nathalie Huber and Antje Wegner , 2013. “Peer Review-Based Selection Decisions in Individual Research Funding, Applicants’ Publication Strategies and Performance: The Case of the ERC Starting Grants”, Research Evaluation, 22 (4): 237-247.

Jörg Neufeld and Markus von Ins , 2011. “Informed Peer Review and Uninformed Bibliometrics?”, Research Evaluation, 20 (1): 31-46.

Helga Nowotny , 2007. How Many Policy Rooms are There?: Evidence-Based and Other Kinds of Science Policies, Science, Technology & Human Values, 32 (4): 479-490.

Carmen Osuna , Laura Cruz-Castro and Luis Sanz-Menendez , 2011. Overturning some Assumptions about the Effects of Evaluation Systems on Publication Performance, Scientometrics, 86: 575-592.

Jason Owen-Smith , 2001. “Managing Laboratory Work through Skepticism: Processes of Evaluation and Control”, American Sociological Review, 66 (3): 427-452.

Jason Owen-Smith and Walter W. Powell , 2001. “To Patent or Not: Faculty Decisions and Institutional Success at Technology Transfer”, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 26 (1-2): 99-114.

Kathryn Packer and Andrew Webster , 1996. “Patenting Culture in Science: Reinventing the Scientific Wheel of Credibility”, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21 (4): 427-453.

Aaron Panofsky , 2011. “Generating Sociability to Drive Science: Patient Advocacy Organizations and Genetics Research”, Social Studies of Science, 41 (1): 31-57.

Keith Pavitt , 2001. “Public Policies to Support Basic Research: What Can the Rest of the World Learn from US Theory and Practice? (And What They Should Not Learn)”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10 (3): 761-779.

Bart Penders , John M. A. Verbakel and Annemiek Nelis , 2009. “The Social Study of Corporate Science: A Research Manifesto”, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29 (6): 439-446.

Markus Perkmann , Valentina Tartari , Maureen McKelvey , Erkko Autio , Anders Broström , Pablo D’Este , Riccardo Fini , Aldo Geuna , Rosa Grimaldi , Alan Hughes , Stefan Krabel , Michael Kitson , Patrick Llerena , Franceso Lissoni , Ammon Salter and Maurizio Sobrero , 2013. “Academic Engagement and Commercialisation: A Review of the Literature on University-Industry Relations”, Research Policy, 42 (2): 423-442.

Trevor Pinch , 1986. Confronting Nature: The Sociology of Solar Neutrino Detection (Dordrecht, Reidel).

Carina A. C. M. Pittens , Janneke E. Elberse , Merel Visse , Tineke A. Abma and Jacqueline E. W. Broerse , 2014. “Research Agendas Involving Patients: Factors that Facilitate or Impede Translation of Patients’ Perspectives in Programming and Implementation”, Science and Public Policy.

Ginger R Polich ., 2011. “Rare Disease Patient Groups as Clinical Researchers”, Drug Discovery Today, 17 (3/4): 167-172.

Vololona Rabeharisoa , Tiago Moreira and Madeleine Akrich , 2014. “Evidence-Based Activism: Patients’, Users’ and Activists’ Groups in Knowledge Society”, BioSocieties, 9 (2): 111-128.

Ismael Rafols , Loet Leydesdorff , Alice O’Hare , Paul Nightingale and Andy Stirling , 2012. “How Journal Rankings can Suppress Interdisciplinary Research: A Comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management”, Research Policy, 41 (7): 1262-1282.

Brian Rappert and Andrew Webster , 1997. “Regimes of Ordering: The Commerzialization of Intellectual Property in Industrial-Academic Collaborations”, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 9 (2): 115-130.

John A Remington ., 1988. “Beyond Big Science in America: The Binding of Inquiry”, Social Studies of Science, 18 (1): 45-72.

Hans-Jörg Rheinberger , 1996. “Comparing Experimental Systems: Protein Synthesis in Microbes and in Animal Tissue at Cambridge (Ernest F. Gale) and at the Massachusetts General Hospital (Paul J. Zamecnik), 1945-1960”, Journal of the History of Biology, 29: 387-416.

Arie Rip , 1994. “The Republic of Science in the 1990s”, Higher Education, 28: 3-32.

Arie Rip , 1997. “A Cognitive Approach to Relevance of Science”, Social Science Information, 36 (4): 615-640.

Arie Rip , 1999. “STS in Europe”, Science Technology & Society, 4 (1): 73-80.

Arie Rip , 2002. “Regional Innovation Systems and the Advent of Strategic Science”, The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27 (1): 123-131.

Alexander Rushforth and Sarah de Rijcke , 2015. “Accounting for Impact? The Journal Impact Factor and the Making of Biomedical Research in the Netherlands”, Minerva, 53 (2): 117-139.

Uwe Schimank , 2005. “‘New ‘Public Management’ and the academic profession: Reflections on the German situation”, Minerva, 43: 361-376.

Terry Shinn and Erwan Lamy , 2006. “Paths of Commercial Knowledge: Forms and Consequences of University-Enterprise Synergy in Scientist-Sponsored Firms”, Research Policy, 35 (10): 1465-1476.

Elizabeth Shove , 2003. “Principals, agents and research programmes”, Science and Public Policy, 30 (5): 371-381.

Sergio Sismondo , 2009. “Ghosts in the Machine: Publication Planning in the Medical Sciences”, Social Studies of Science, 39 (2): 171-198.

Katherine Smith , 2010. “Research, Policy and Funding––Academic Treadmills and the Squeeze on Intellectual Spaces”, The British Journal of Sociology, 61 (1): 176-195.

Katherine E Smith ., 2014. “The Politics of Ideas: The Complex Interplay of Health Inequalities Research and Policy”, Science and Public Policy, 41 (5): 561-574.

Tereza Stöckelová , 2012. “Immutable Mobiles Derailed: STS, Geopolitics, and Research Assessment”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 37 (2): 286-311.

Noemi Tousignant , 2013. “Broken Tempos: Of Means and Memory in a Senegalese University Laboratory”, Social Studies of Science. doi: 10.1177/0306312713482187.

G. D. L. Travis and H. M. Collins , 1991. “New Light on Old Boys: Cognitive and Institutional Particularism in the Peer Review System”, Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16 (3): 322-341.

Sarah Trousset , 2014. “Current Trends in Science and Technology Policy Research: An Examination of Published Works from 2010-2012”, Policy Studies Journal, 42: S87-S117.

Pleun Van Arensbergen , Inge van der Weijden and Peter van den Besselaar , 2014. “The selection of talent as a group process. A literature review on the social dynamics of decision making in grant panels”, Research Evaluation, 23 (4): 298-311.

Peter Van den Besselaar , 2000. “Communication between science and technology studies journals: A case study in differentiation and integration in scientific fields”, Scientometrics, 47 (2): 169-193.

Peter Van den Besselaar , 2001. “The cognitive and social structure of STS”, Scientometrics, 51 (2): 441-460.

Peter Van den Besselaar and Loet Leydesdorff , 2009. “Past Performance, Peer Review and Project Selection: A Case Study in the Social and Behavioral Sciences”, Research Evaluation, 18 (4): 273-288.

Barend Van der Meulen , 1998. “Science Policies as Principal-Agent Games: Institutionalization and Path Dependency in The Relation between Government and Science”, Research Policy, 27: 397-414.

Van Lente Harro and Arie Rip , 1998. “The Rise of Membrane Technology: From Rhetorics to Social Reality”, Social Studies of Science, 28 (2): 221-254.

Diane Vaughan , 1999. “The Role of the Organization in the Production of Techno-Scientific Knowledge”, Social Studies of Science, 29 (6): 913-943.

Eric Von Hippel , 1987. “Cooperation between Rivals: Informal Know-How Trading”, Research Policy, 16 (6): 291-302.

Caroline S. Wagner and Jeffrey Alexander , 2013. “Evaluating Transformative Research Programmes: A Case Study of the NSF Small Grants for Exploratory Research Programme”, Research Evaluation, 22: 187-197.

John P. Walsh , Wesley M. Cohen and Charlene Cho , 2007. “Where Excludability Matters: Material Versus Intellectual Property in Academic Biomedical Research”, Research Policy, 36 (8): 1184-1203.

Andrew Webster , 2007. “Crossing Boundaries: Social Science in the Policy Room”, Science, Technology & Human Values, 32 (4): 458-478.

Don F. Westerheijden , Harry De Boer and Jürgen Enders , 2009. “Netherlands: An “Echternach” Procession in Different Directions: Oscillating Steps towards Reform”, in C. Paradeise , E. Reale , I. Bleiklie and E. Ferlie , eds., University Governance: Western European Comparative Perspectives (Dordrecht, Springer: 103-125).

Richard Whitley , 2010. “Reconfiguring the public sciences: The impact of governance changes on authority and innovation in public science systems”, in R. Whitley , J. Gläser and L. Engwall , eds., Reconfiguring Knowledge Production (Oxford, Oxford University Press: 3-47).

Richard Whitley and Jochen Gläser , eds., 2007. The Changing Governance of the Sciences: The Advent of Research Evaluation Systems (Dordrecht, Springer).

Edward Woodhouse , David Hess , Steve Breyman and Brian Martin , 2002. “Science Studies and Activism: Possibilities and Problems for Reconstructivist Agendas”, Social Studies of Science, 32 (2): 297-319.

Arend H. Zomer , Ben W. A. Jongbloed and Jürgen Enders , 2010. “Do Spin-Offs Make the Academics’ Heads Spin?”, Minerva, 48 (3): 331-353.

Michèle Lamont , Gregorie Mallard and Joshua Guetzkow , 2006. “Beyond Blind Faith: Overcoming the Obstacles to Interdisciplinary Evaluation”, Research Evaluation 15 (1): 43-57.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie
  • ISSN: 0003-9756
  • EISSN: 1474-0583
  • URL: /core/journals/european-journal-of-sociology-archives-europeennes-de-sociologie
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 16
Total number of PDF views: 218 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 957 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd September 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.