Understanding contemporary environments in the laboratory and elsewhere requires grappling conceptually with multiple, coexisting, nonconforming infrastructures which actors engage at the same time. In this article, I develop the analytical vocabulary of “seams” for studying heterogeneous, multi-infrastructural environments. Drawing upon six years of ethnographic fieldwork with two distributed science teams, as well as studies in Ubiquitous Computing, I examine overlaps among infrastructures and how actors work creatively with and across their seams. Rather than suggesting that actors are hemmed in or incapacitated by multiple infrastructural commitments, inclusions, and exclusions, I show instead how they work artfully to align them in ways concordant with membership and how this produces both consequences for their work and opportunities for analysis.
BeaulieuAnne. 2010. “From Co-location to Co-presence: Shifts in the Use of Ethnography for the Study of Knowledge.”Social Studies of Science40 (3): 453–70.
BoellsdorfTom. 2008. Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores the Virutally Human. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
BowkerGeoffrey. 1994. Science on the Run: Information Management and Industrial Science at Schlumberger, 1920-1940. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
BowkerGeoffreyStarSusan Leigh. 1999. Sorting Things Out: Classification and its Consequences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
ChalmersMatthewGalaniAreti. 2004. “Seamful Interweaving: Heterogeneity in the Theory and Design of Interactive Systems.” In Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques (DIS '04), 243–52. New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1013115.1013149.
7.
ChalmersMatthewBellMarekBrownBarryHallMalcolmSherwoodScottTennentPaul. 2005. “Gaming on the Edge: Using Seams in Ubicomp Games.” In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGCHI International Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology (ACE '05), 306-09. New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1178477.1178533.
8.
CohnMarisaSimSusan ElliottLeeCharlotte. 2009. “What Counts as Software Process? Negotiating the Boundary Work of Software Work through Artifacts and Conversation.”Journal of Computer Supported Cooperative Work18 (5-6): 401–43.
9.
DourishPaul. 2001. Where the Action Is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
DourishPaulBellGenevieve. 2011. Divining a Digital Future: Mess and Mythology in Ubiquitous Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11.
EdwardsPaul. 2010. A Vast Machine: Computer Models, Climate Data, and the Politics of Global Warming. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
GalisonPeter. 1997. Image and Logic: the Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13.
GarfinkelHarald. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
14.
GierynTom. 1999. Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
GillespieTarletonBoczkowskiPabloFootKirsten, eds. 2013. Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality, and Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
GoffmanErving. 1967. Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face-to-face Behavior. New York: Pantheon.
17.
HaithornthwaiteCarolyn. 2005. “Social Networks and Internet Connectivity Effects.”Information, Communication & Society8 (2): 125–47.
18.
HarawayDonna. 1991. Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The Reinvention of Nature. New York: Routledge.
19.
HendersonKathryn. 1999. On Line and on Paper: Visual Representations, Visual Culture, and Computer Graphics in Design Engineering. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20.
HineChristine. 2002. “Cyberscience and Social Boundaries: The Implications of Laboratory Talk on the Internet.” Sociological Research Online7 (2): 79–99. Accessed December 6, 2013. http://www.socresonline.org.uk/7/2/hine.html.
21.
JacksonJ. StevenRibesDavidBuyukturAyseBowkerGeoffrey C.. 2011. “Collaborative Rhythm: Temporal Dissonance and Alignment in Collaborative Scientific work.” In Proceedings of the ACM 2011 conference on Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW '11), 245–54. New York: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1958824.1958861.
22.
KnorrKarin CetinaBrueggerUrs. 2002. “Global Microstructures: The Virtual Societies of Financial Markets.”American Journal of Sociology107 (4): 905–50.
23.
LatourBruno. 1990. “Drawing Things Together.” In Representation in Scientific Practice, edited by LynchMichaelWoolgarSteve, 19–68. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24.
LawJohn. 1987. “Technology and Heterogeneous Engineering: the Case of the Portuguese Expansion.” In The Social Construction of Technological Systems, edited by BijkerWiebeHughesThomasPinchTrevor, 111–13. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25.
LawJohn. 2002. Aircraft Stories: Decentering the Object in Technoscience Studies. Raleigh, NC: Duke University Press.
26.
LynchMichael. 1991. “Laboratory Space and the Technological Complex: An Investigation of Topical Contextures.”Science in Context4 (1): 51–78.
27.
McCarthyJoseph F.boyddanahChurchillElizabeth F.GriswoldWilliam G.LawleyElizabethZanerMelora. 2004. “Digital Backchannels in Shared Physical Spaces: Attention, Intention and Contention.” In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work (CSCW '04), 550–53. New York: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1031607.1031700.
28.
McCrayPatrick. 2012. The Visioneers: How a Group of Elite Scientists Pursued Space Colonies, Nanotechnologies, and a Limitless Future, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
MillerandFlorenceRibesDavidBakerKaren S.BowkerGeoffrey C.. 2013. “Making an Issue out of a Standard: Storytelling Practices in a Scientific Community.”Science, Technology, & Human Values38 (1): 7–43.
30.
MolAnnemarieLawJohn. 2002. “Complexities: An Introduction.” In Complexities: Social Studies of Knowledge Practices, edited by LawJohnMolAnnemarie, 1–22. Raleigh, NC: Duke University Press.
31.
OldenzielR.2011. “Islands: the United States as a Networked Empire.” In Entangled Geographies: Empire and Technopolitics in the Global Cold War, edited by HechtGabrielle, 13–41. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32.
OlsonGaryBosNathanZimmermanA., eds. 2008. Scientific Collaboration on the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.
RibesD.LeeC. P.. 2010. “Sociotechnical Studies of Cyberinfrastructure and e-Research: Current Themes and Future Trajectories.”Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19 (3-4): 231–44.
34.
SchegloffEmanuel. 1972. “Notes on a Conversational Practice: Formulating Place.” In Studies in Social Interaction, edited by SudnowDavid, 75–119. New York: MacMillan.
35.
ShapinStevenSchafferSimon. 1985. Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
36.
StarSusan Leigh. 1991. “Power, Technologies, and the Phenomenology of Standards: On Being Allergic to Onions.” In A Sociology of Monsters? Essays on Power, Technology and Domination (Sociological Review Monograph 38), edited by LawJ., 26–56. New York: Routledge.
37.
StarSusan Leigh. 1999. “The Ethnography of Infrastructure.”American Behavioral Scientist43 (3): 377–91.
38.
StarSusan LeighGriesemerJames. 1989. “Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39.”Social Studies of Science19 (3): 387–420.
39.
StarkDavid. 2009. The Sense of Dissonance: Accounts of Worth in Economic Life. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
40.
StrathernMarilyn. 1991. Partial Connections. Savage, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
41.
SuchmanLucy. 2007. Human-machine Reconfigurations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
WoutersPaulBeaulieuAnneScharnhorstAndreaWyattSally. 2013. Virtual Knowledge: Experimenting in the Humanities and the Social Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
