AO: As the analyst’s definition showed (see Micro), they assume that a good collaborator follows the shared rules, norms and structures to act/decide. They note that the
AO: The authors are thinking about transnational institutional co-authorship as “collaboration” (not individual co-authorship). “we assume that in most cases coauthorship indicates a...Read more
AO: The authors talk about how lack of lab materials, etc. may incentivize greater collaboration in certain fields.
AO: Cerwonka writes: “one of my motivations for collaborating with Liisa on this book was my sense that as more and more scholars undertake interdisciplinary work, they face
AO: she looks at collaboration between developers, designers and the editorial team of CA (281). “Designing and developing digital infrastructure is one place where we can cultivate...Read more
AO: She does not describe this but it would be assumed that the colonial acts of taking native lands and one's relationship to those lands.
AO: The analyst is interested in power differentials within researcher-researched relationships and understanding why Anthroplogists are now (again) interested in engagement. She is
AO: This editorial intro by Fortun and Cherkasky focuses largely on the meta, nano and practice (micro) levels of conceptualizing “counter-expertise”.Read more
AO: Analysts note that an understanding of machines as collaborators in knowledge production, and an awareness of the impacts of materiality on such production, becomes a
AO: They believe research collaboration is important as it can deliver intellectual and emotional synergy. They note that their authorial voice cannot be distinguished between the
AO: The analysts note that increasingly, the only way to identify whether someone is a psychologist or economist is to look at their institutional affiliation.