4.3 Article

Doing laboratory ethnography: reflections on method in scientific workplaces

期刊

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
卷 17, 期 2, 页码 202-216

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1468794116678040

关键词

animal models; cultured meat; laboratory ethnography; interaction order; methods; psychiatric genetics; robotic surgery; Science and Technology Studies; sensory ethnography; space

资金

  1. Curating and Husbandry in the UK Stem Cell Bank [Res-00022-1136]
  2. UK Stem Cell Bank - An Institutional Ecology [Res-349-25-0001]
  3. ERSC: From Bench to Brain: The Processes of Developing Neurological Stem-Cell Therapies [Res-349-25-0001]
  4. Wellcome Trust Biomedical Strategic Award [086034]
  5. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) [EP/H45848/1]
  6. Economic and Social Research Council [Res-349-25-0001]
  7. Seventh Framework Programme [288971]
  8. Wellcome Trust [WT096541MA]
  9. Welsh Crucible
  10. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/H045848/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  11. EPSRC [EP/H045848/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laboratory ethnography extended the social scientist's gaze into the day-to-day accomplishment of scientific practice. Here we reflect upon our own ethnographies of biomedical scientific workspaces to provoke methodological discussion on the doing of laboratory ethnography. What we provide is less a how to' guide and more a commentary on what to look for and what to look at. We draw upon our empirical research with stem cell laboratories and animal houses, teams producing robotic surgical tools, musicians sonifying data science, a psychiatric genetics laboratory, and scientists developing laboratory grown meat. We use these cases to example a set of potential ethnographic themes worthy of pursuit: science epistemics and the extended laboratory, the interaction order of scientific work, sensory realms and the rending of science as sensible, conferences as performative sites, and the spaces, places and temporalities of scientific work.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据