CallonM. (1987). Society in the making: The study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In BijkerW. E.HughesT. P.PinchT. J. (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 83-103). Cambridge: MIT Press.
2.
CotgroveS.BoxS. (1970). Science, industry and society. Studies in the sociology of science. London, England: George Allen & Unwin.
3.
GrossB. (2011). The quest for “Magnalux”: Redefining technological success and failure at RCA, 1951-1956. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 435–447.
4.
HansenB. G. (2011). Beyond the boundary: Science, industry and managing symbiosis. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 493–505.
5.
HessD. J. (2007). Alternative pathways in science and industry: Activism, innovation, and the environment in an era of globalization. Cambridge: MIT Press.
6.
JonesM. P. (2009). Entrepreneurial science: The rules of the game. Social Studies of Science, 39, 821-851.
7.
JonesM. P. (2011). Networked success and failure at Hybritech. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 448–459.
8.
LamA. (2010). From “ivory tower traditionalists” to “entrepreneurial scientists”? Academic scientists in fuzzy university-industry boundaries. Social Studies of Science, 40, 307-340.
9.
LatourB. (1993). We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
National Science Board. (2010). Science and engineering indicators 2010. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
11.
OudshoornN.PinchT. (2008). User-technology relationships: Some recent developments. In HackettE. J.AmsterdamskaO.LynchM.WajcmanJ. (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed., pp. 541-566). Cambridge: MIT Press.
12.
PendersB. (2011). Cool and safe: Multiplicity in safe innovation at Unilever. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 472–481.
13.
PendersB.NelisA. P. (2011). Credibility engineering in the food industry: Linking science, regulation, and marketing in a corporate context. Science in Context, 24, 487-515. doi:10.1017/S026988971100020210.1017/S0269889711000202
14.
PendersB.VerbakelJ. M. A.NelisA. P. (2009). The social study of corporate science: A research manifesto. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 29, 439-446.
15.
RasmussenN. (2004). The moral economy of the drug company: Medical scientist collaboration in interwar America. Social Studies of Science, 34, 161-185.
16.
RavetzJ. (2009). Morals and manners in modern science. Nature, 457, 662-663.
17.
SchleiferD. (2011). We spent a million bucks and then we had to do something: The unexpected implications of industry involvement in trans fat research. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 460–471.
18.
ShapinS. (2008, November20). The scientist in 2008. Seed.
19.
SismondoS. (2011). Corporate disguises in medical science: Dodging the interest repertoire. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 482 -492.
20.
TuunainenJ. (2005). Contesting a hybrid firm at a traditional university. Social Studies of Science, 35, 173-210.
21.
VanderburgW. H. (2005). Living in the labyrinth of technology. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: University of Toronto Press.
22.
VedelJ. B.GadC. (2011). A public trial de novo: Rethinking “industrial interests”. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 31(6), 506–517.
23.
WoolgarS.CoopmansC.NeylandD. (2009). Does STS mean business?Organization, 16, 5-30.