Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Recent breakthroughs in superconducting materials reveal the interdisciplinary thrust of modern science and technology. The past fragmentation and specialization of scientific and technical fields is countered by the need for joint research, occurring in several institutional contexts—university, governmental, and industrial—and on an international scale, all affecting the nature of science and technology communication. Recognition that the nation's security and economy depend upon its scientific and technological base means that government is increasingly concerned with its direction; at the same time, the internal dynamism of science and technology requires complex and costly endeavors, making them increasingly dependent upon governmental support and hence public approval. Informing the general public and policymakers adds external dimensions to communication needs. Furthermore, the complex nature of innovation requires greater and speedier communication within the science-technology community, met by more publications and advances in electronic communications, but not to the exclusion of the human element.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. William J. Bouwsma et al. , “Specialization and Professionalism within the University,” ACLS Newsletter, 36(3-4):1-31 (Summer-Fall 1985).

2. Arnold Reisman , “Expansion of Knowledge via Consolidation of Knowledge” (Technical Memorandum #594, Department of Operations Research, Case Western Reserve University, 1986).

3. Melvin Kranzberg , “The Wedding of Science and Technology: A Very Modern Marriage,” in Technology and Science: Important Distinctions for Liberal Arts Colleges, ed. J. H. Burnett (Davidson, NC: Davidson College, 1984), pp. 27-37.

4. Edwin T. Layton , “Mirror-Image Twins: The Communities of Science and Technology in 19th-Century America,” Technology and Culture, 12:562-580 (1971).

5. Derek de Solla Price , “Of Sealing Wax and String,” Natural History, 93(1):49-56 (1984).

6. Yakov M. Rabkin , “Technological Innovation in Science: The Adoption of Infrared Spectroscopy by Chemists,” ISIS, 78(291):31 (Mar. 1987).

7. Phillip H. Abelson , “Instrumentation and Computers,” American Scientist, 74:182 (Mar.-Apr. 1986).

8. Donald S.L. Cardwell , Turning Points in Western Technology (New York: Neale Watson, 1972), p. ix.

9. R. Whitley , The Intellectual and Social Organizations of the Sciences (New York: Oxford University Press, Clarendon Press, 1984).

10.

10. Melvin Kranzberg , ed., Technological Education—Technological Style (San Francisco: San Francisco Press, 1986), pp. 1-13, 75-84.

11.

11. Dundar F. Kocaoglu , “Editorial: Engineering Management—New Perspectives,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-33, 1:1 (Feb. 1986).

12.

12. Science & Technology Quarterly (Science Council of Singapore), 6(2):6, 12-14 (Jan. 1987).

13.

13. Kevin A. Boyle , “Technology Transfer between Universities and the U.K. Offshore Industry,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-33, 1:33-42 (Feb. 1986).

14.

14. Science, 22 May 1987, p. 909.

15.

15. Edward Wenk , Tradeoffs (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1986).

16.

16. Fitz Machlup and Kenneth Leeson , Information through the Printed Word: The Dissemination of Scholarly, Scientific, and Intellectual Knowledge, 4 vols. (New York: Praeger, 1978-80).

17.

17. Constance Holden , “Libraries Stunned by Journal Price Increases,” Science, 22 May 1987, pp. 908-909.

18.

18. Kim McDonald , “Race to Produce Superconducting Materials Stirs Concern over Publications and Patents,” Chronicle of Higher Education, 29 Apr. 1987.

19.

19. Phillip H. Abelson , “Instrumentation and Computers,” American Scientist, 74:182 (Mar.-Apr. 1986).

20.

20. John S. Mayo , “The Evolution of Information Technologies,” in Information Technologies and Social Transformation, ed. Bruce R. Guiley (Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1985), pp. 7-33.

21.

21. U.S., Congress, Office of Technology Assessment , Intellectual Property Rights in an Age of Electronics and Information, 052-003-01036-4 (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1986).

22.

22. Thomas J. Allen and Stephen I. Cohen , “Information Flow in Research and Development Laboratories,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 14:12-19 (1969).

23.

23. Robert L. Taylor , “The Impact of Organizational Change on the Technological Gatekeeper Role,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, EM-33, 1:12-16 (Feb. 1986).

24.

24. Arnold Thackray, comp. , Contemporary Classics in Engineering and Applied Science (Philadelphia: ISI Press, 1986).

Interdependence of Scientific and Technological Information and Its Relation to Public Decision Making

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References