Abbott, A. (2001). Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Andersen, H. (2010). Joint acceptance and scientific change: A case study. Episteme, 7(3), 248—265.

Andersen, H., & Wagenknecht, S. (2013). Epistemic dependence in interdisciplinary groups. Synthese, 190(11), 1881—1898.

Balog, C. (1979/1980). Multiple authorship and author collaboration in agricultural research publications. Journal of Research Communication Studies, 2, 159-169.

Beaver, D. d., & Rosen, R. (1978). Studies in scientific collaboration: Part I — the professional origins of scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(1), 64—84.

Beaver, D. d., & Rosen, R. (1979a). Studies in scientific collaboration: Part III — professionalization and the natural history of modern scientific co-authorship. Scientometrics, 1(3), 231—245.

Beaver, D. d., & Rosen, R. (1979b). Studies in scientific collaboration: Part II — scientific co-authorship, research productivity and visibility in the French scientific elite, 1799—1830. Scientometrics, 1(2), 133—149.

Bechtel, W. (1986). Integrating scientific disciplines: Case studies from the life sciences. Dordrecht: Springer.

Bouvier, A. (2004). Individual beliefs and collective beliefs in sciences and philosophy: The plural subject and the polyphonic subject accounts: Case studies. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(3), 382—407.

Braun, T., Gomez, I., Mendez, A., & Schubert, A. (1992). International coauthorship patterns in physics and its subfields. Scientometrics, 24(2), 181— 200.

Campbell, D. T. (1969). Ethnocentrism of disciplines and the fish-scale model of omniscience. In M. Sherif & C. W. Sherif (Eds.), Interdisciplinary relationships in the social sciences (pp. 328—348). New Jersey: Aldine Transaction.

Cheon, H. (2014). In what sense is scientific knowledge collective knowledge? Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 44(4), 407—423.

Clarke, B. L. (1964). Multiple authorship trends in scientific papers. Science, 143(3608), 822-824.

Cohen, B. P., Kruse, R. J., & Anbar, M. (1982). The social structure of scientific research teams. The Pacific Sociological Review, 25(2), 205-232.

Cronin, B. (2005). The hand of science: Academic writing and its rewards. Lanham: Scarecrow Press.

Cronin, B., Shaw, D., & Barre, K. L. (2004). Visible, less visible, and invisible work: Patterns of collaboration in 20th century chemistry. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55(2), 160-168.

Darden, L., &Maull, N. (1977). Interfield theories. Philosophy of Science, 44(1), 43-64.

Edge, D., & Mulkay, M. J. (1976). Astronomy transformed: The emergence of radio astronomy in Britain. New York: Wiley.

Etzkowitz, H. (1992). Individual investigators and their research group. Minerva, 30(1), 28-50.

Fagan, M. B. (2011). Is there collective scientific knowledge? Arguments from explanation. The Philosophical Quarterly, 61(243), 247-269.

Frodeman, R., Klein, J. T., Mitcham, C., & Holbrook, J. B. (Eds.). (2010). The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Frost-Arnold, K. (2014). The cognitive attitude of rational trust. Synthese, 191, 1957-1974.

Gilbert, M. (1987). Modelling collective belief. Synthese, 73(1), 185-204.

Gillespie, D. F., & Birmbaum, P. H. (1980). Status concordance, coordination, and success in interdisciplinary research terms. Human Relations, 33(1), 4156.

Hackett, E. (2005). Essential tensions: Identity, control, and risk in research. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 787—826.

Hagstrom, W. (1974a). Competition in science. American Sociological Review, 39(1), 1-18.

Hagstrom, W. (1974b). The production of culture in science. American Behavioral Scientist, 19(6), 753-768.

Hardwig, J. (1991). The role of trust in knowledge. The Journal of Philosophy, 88(12), 693-708.

Holbrook, J. B. (2013). What is interdisciplinary communication? Reflections on the very idea of disciplinary integration. Synthese, 190(11), 1865-1879.

Huutoniemi, K., Klein, J. T., Bruun, H., & Hukkinen, J. (2010). Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators. Research Policy, 39(1), 79-88.

Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is research collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18.

Klein, J. T. (1996). Crossing boundaries: Knowledge, disciplinarities, and interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

Klein, J. T. (2010). A taxonomy of interdisciplinary. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 15-30). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Knorr-Cetina, K. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge - an essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Lee, S., & Bozeman, B. (2005). The impact of research collaboration on scientific productivity. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 673-702.

MacIntyre, A. (1980). Epistemological crisis, dramatic narrative, and the philosophy of science. In G. Gutting (Ed.), Paradigms and revolutions: Applications and appraisals of Thomas Kuhn’s philosophy of science (pp. 54-74). Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

Maienschein, J. (1993). Why collaborate? Journal of the History of Biology, 26 (2), 167-183.

Maki, U. (2009). Economics imperialism: Concept and constraints. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 39(3), 351-380.

Mansilla, V. B. (2006). Assessing expert interdisciplinary work at the frontier: an empirical exploration. Research Evaluation, 15(1), 17-29.

Mattila, E. (2005). Interdisciplinarity “in the making”: Modeling infectious diseases. Perspectives on Science, 13(4), 531-553.

Meadows, A. J. (1974). Communication in science. London: Butterworths.

Meadows, A. J., & O’Connor, J. G. (1971). Bibliographical statistics as a guide to growth points in science. Social Studies of Science, /(1), 95—99.

Merton, R. K. (1965). On the shoulders of giants. a shandean postscript. NewYork, London: Free Press.

Mitchell, S. D., Daston, L., Gigerenzer, G., Sesardic, N., & Sloep, P. B. (1997). The whys and hows of interdisciplinarity. In P. Weingart, S. D. Mitchell, P. J. Richerson, & S. Maasen (Eds.), Human by nature: Between biology and the social sciences (pp. 103—150). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Moody, J. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69(2), 213-238.

Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2010). Forms of positioning in interdisciplinary science practice and their epistemic effects. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40(2), 136-161.

Paletz, S. B. F., & Schunn, C. D. (2010). A social-cognitive framework of multidisciplinary team innovation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(1), 73-95.

Petrie, H. G. (1976). Do you see what I see? The epistemology of interdisciplinary inquiry. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 10(1), 29-43.

Poulsen, M.-B. J. (2001). Competition and cooperation: what rules in scientific dynamics? Journal of Technology Management, 22(7/8), 782-793.

Rolin, K. (2010). Group justification in science. Episteme, 7(3), 215-231.

Rolin, K. (2014). Facing the incompleteness of epistemic trust—a critical reply. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 3(5), 74-78.

Rossini, F. A., & Porter, A. L. (1979). Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research. Research Policy, §(1), 70-79.

Rouse, J. (1996). Engaging science: How to understand its practices philosophically. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Subramanyam, K. (1983). Bibliometric studies of research collaboration: A review. Journal of Information Science, 6(1), 33-38.

Thagard, P (1997). Collaborative knowledge. Nous, 31(2), 242-261.

Toomela, A. (2007). Sometimes one is more than two: When collaboration inhibits knowledge construction. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(2), 198-207.

Traweek, S. (1988). Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Wagenknecht, S., Nersessian, N. J., & Andersen, H. (2015). Empirical philosophy of science: Introducing qualitative methods into philosophy of science (introduction). In S. Wagenknecht, N. J. Nersession, & H. Andersen (Eds.), Empirical philosophy of science. Introducing qualitative methods into philosophy of science (pp. 1-10). Dordrecht: Springer.

Wagner, C. S., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). Network structure, self-organization, and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research policy, 34(10), 1608-1618.

Weingart, P., & Stehr, N. (Eds.). (2000). Practicing interdisciplinarity. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Wray, B. K. (2002). The epistemic significance of collaborative research. Philosophy of Science, 69(1), 150-168.

Wray, B. K. (2006). Scientific authorship in the age of collaborative research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37(3), 505-514.

Wylie, A. (1999). Rethinking unity as a “working hypothesis” for philosophy of science: How archaeologists exploit the disunities of science. Perspectives on Science, 7(3), 293-317.

Zuckerman, H. (1967). Nobel laureates in science: Patterns of productivity, collaboration, and authorship. American Sociological Review, 32(3), 391-403.

< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >