The authors study how an aerosol technology research group constructed a research agenda for itself and how its activity was changed in the process. The group's research agenda was heterogeneous, comprising several research areas in which the knowledge of aerosols was applied in different industrial contexts. The authors analyze the development of one of these areas, the research on the production of ultrafine particles from 1992 to 1997, employing the concept of mediated activity that has been developed in the cultural-historical theory of activity. In the analysis, the activity is seen as the coevolution of the subject, the means, and the research object and the networks of collaboration with other activities. The applications developed in the collaborative networks significantly influence the identity and learning of the researchers, the construction of tools and instruments, and the selection of the phenomena to be studied.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Cambrosio, A., and P. Keating. 1995. Exquisite specificity: The monoclonal antibody revolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
2.
Cole, M., and Y. Engeström. 1993. A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations, edited by G. Salomon, 1-46. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
3.
de Solla Price, D.1984. Of sealing wax and string. Natural History93 (1): 48-56.
4.
Dewey, J.1988. Experience and nature. The later works of John Dewey, volume 1: 1925. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
5.
Dewey, J.1991. Logic: The theory of inquiry. The later works of John Dewey, volume 12: 1938. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
6.
Engeström, Y.1987. Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta Konsultit.
7.
Engeström, Y., and V. Escalante. 1995. Mundane tool or object of affection? The rise and fall of the postal buddy. In Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction, edited by B. A. Nardi, 325-373. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Fleck, L.1981. Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
9.
Fujimura, J. H.1987. Constructing “do-able” problems in cancer research: Articulating alignment. Social Studies of Science17:257-293.
10.
Fujimura, J. H.1996. Crafting science: A sociohistory of the quest for the genetics of cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
Gruber, H. E.1981. Darwin on man: A psychological study of scientific creativity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
Gurav, A. G., T. T. Kodas, L. -M. Wang, E. I. Kauppinen, and J. Joutsensaari. 1994. Generation of nanometer-size fullerene particles via vapor condensation. Chemical Physics Letters218:304-308.
13.
Hacking, I.1983. Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14.
Holmes, F. L.1987. Lavoisier and the chemistry of life: An exploration of scientific creativity. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
15.
Knorr-Cetina, K.1982. Scientific communities or transepistemic arenas of research? A critique of quasi-economic models of science. Social Studies of Science12:101-130.
16.
Kohler, R. E.1994. Lords of the fly: Drosophila genetics and the experimental life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17.
Latour, B.1987. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
18.
Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1979. Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
19.
Leont’ev, A. N.1978. Activity, consciousness and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
20.
Lynch, M.1985. Art and artifact in laboratory science: A study of shop work and shop talk in a research laboratory. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
21.
Miettinen, R.1990. Laboratory work in changing society: Neutron activation analysis in a research laboratory. Science Studies3 (2): 35-52.
22.
Miettinen, R.1998. Object construction and networks in research work: The case of research on cellulose degrading enzymes. Social Studies of Science28 (3): 423-463.
23.
Miettinen, R.1999. The riddle of things: Activity theory and actor network theory as approaches of studying innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity6 (3): 170-195.
24.
Pickering, A.1995. Mangle of practice: Time & agency and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
Saari, E.1999. Dynamics of collaboration: The case of Finnish and American Aerosol Research Groups. Science Studies12 (1): 21-43.
26.
Star, S. L.1989. Regions of the mind: Brain research and the quest for scientific certainty. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
27.
Strauss, A.1988. The articulation of project works: An organizational process. The Sociological Quarterly29 (2): 163-178.
28.
Strauss, A., S. Fagerhaugh, B. Suczek, and C. Wiener. 1985. The social organization of medical work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
Stokes, D. E.1997. Pasteur's quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Harrisonburg, VA: R. R. Donnelley.
30.
Traweek, H.1988. Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31.
Vygotsky, L. S.1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
