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 is a discourse analysis of the way that organizational theorists are thinking about collaboration (authors map nine papers over 6 domains of collaboration to
AO: Strategically engaging the “double binds” within which we operate. The analysts note that “double bind situations create a persistent mismatch between explanation and everyday
AO: A convening power that has legitimacy among the stakeholders and the authority to organize the domain as well as an unbiased and even-handed approach to the problem
AO: Shared topic interests (e.g. discussion about the self-interested nature of people; historically different opinion with regard to the rationality of people).Read more
Kim Fortun and Todd Cherkasky explicate how they are thinking about "counter-expertise" as "a way of taking responsibility for expert knowledge and status, while questioning the conventional role experts play in framing political choices" (1998, 141).Read more
AO: The analysts propose six theoretical perspectives to explain and examine collaborative behavior: resource dependence, corporate social performance/institutional
AO: Not discussed although it is suggested that greater collaboration between economists and psychologists can lead to better policy and “efficiency of interventions” (390)Read more
AO: “Many psychologists in this subfield are now realizing that in order for their theories to have an impact outside psychology, in areas such as economics, law, and politics, they
In this article, Mike Fortun discusses discusses the complicated double-binds that impacted his "response-ability" while working in and on the Institute for Science and Interdisciplinary Studies (ISIS).Read more