AO: The analysts are concerned with examining “ways to categorize and measure collaborative efforts; developing models to conceptualize key aspects of the field; and devising
AO: The analysts note that the science of team science is currently in its nascent stage and that definitions are being debated. For example, interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary
AO: The authors write: “We thus express commitment to an inductive process of research, where the emergence of design problems comes through grounded and participatory inquiry. We
AO: The analysts use post-structuralist work to aruge that the current imaginary of the “subject as informant” does not stand given the desire for the epistemic partner to perform an
AO: The authors note heavy use of online communication and collaboration tools including Facebook groups, Wiki pages, blogs, email and message groups. (page 50).
AO: They do not talk about this explicitly but they note the collaborative milieu that is now the normative environment of research (which is supported by research grants and “
AO: The paper is co-authored and authors note the first author’s “insider” status and second and third authors’ “outsider” status (although they all reside in Switzerland?). Here,
AO: The issue of authorship begins even before the actual writing of the paper as the analysts note: “Who is given the opportunity to contribute, and thus potentially qualify as an
AO: The authors write: they are“finding the design problem through participation with the community” but it is very unclear what exactly they are doing that is “collaborative” other
AO: Less about data practices in the collaboration and more about how the research team collected their data of what was going on online: “We are taking screenshots of Facebook
