Researchers interested in the structure of scientific fields have documented increases in specialization and collaboration. How, if at all, are these two trends related? Is specialization so severe that scholars cannot collaborate unless they share specific research interests? Or, have specializing tendencies promoted research that joins specialty areas and broaches new topics? We answer these important questions for a single discipline, sociology, using both qualitative interviews and latent profile analysis. We empirically identify three collaborative styles that depend on both the areas and extent of specialization in coauthors' research programs. The prominence of the reinforcing generalist profile suggests that specialization in science mainly serves to encourage scholars to work with others in their specialty area. However, the existence of two other styles — a more complementary one and one that is characterized by migration into new intellectual terrain — suggests that subfields within sociology are permeable enough to permit boundary-spanning, original research.
Abbott, Andrew (2000) `Reflections on the Future of Sociology', Contemporary Sociology29: 296-300.
2.
Abbott, Andrew (2001) Chaos of Disciplines (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).
3.
Babchuk, Nicholas, Bruce Keith & George Peters (1999) `Collaboration in Sociology and Other Scientific Disciplines', American Sociologist30(3): 5-21.
4.
Becher, Tony (1990) `The Counter-culture of Specialization', European Journal of Education25(3): 333-46.
5.
Ben-David, Joseph & Randall Collins (1966) `Social Factors in the Origins of New Science: The Case of Psychology', American Sociological Review31: 451-65.
6.
Blau, Peter J. (1994) The Organization of Academic Work ( New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction).
7.
Blau, Peter J., Terry C. Blum & Joseph E. Schwartz (1982) `Heterogeneity and Intermarriage ', American Sociological Review47(1): 45-62.
8.
Bozeman, Barry & Elizabeth Corley (2004) `Scientists' Collaboration Strategies: Implications for Scientific and Human Capital', Research Policy33(4): 599-616.
9.
Calhoun, Craig (1992) Sociology, Other Disciplines, and the Project of a General Understanding of Social Life (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).
10.
Clemens, Elisabeth S., Walter W. Powell, Kris McIlwaine & Dina Okamoto (1995) `Careers in Print: Books, Journals, and Scholarly Reputations', American Journal of Sociology101(2): 433-94.
11.
Cole, Jonathan R. & Harriet Zuckerman (1975) `The Emergence of a Scientific Specialty: The Self-Exemplifying Case of the Sociology of Science', in L. Coser (ed.), The Idea of Social Structure: Essays in Honor of Robert K. Merton ( New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich): 139-74.
12.
Cole, Stephen (ed.) (2001) What's Wrong with Sociology?New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
13.
Collins, Randall (1986) `Is 1980s Sociology in the Doldrums? ' American Journal of Sociology91(6): 1336-55.
14.
Collins, Randall (1989) `Toward a Theory of Intellectual Change: The Social Causes of Philosophies', Science, Technology, and Human Values14(2): 107-40.
15.
Collins, Randall (1994) `Why the Social Science Won't Become High-consensus, Rapid-discovery Science', Sociological Forum9(2): 155-77.
16.
Collins, Randall (1998) Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
17.
Crane, Diana (1969) `Social Structure in a Group of Scientists: A Test of the "Invisible College". Hypothesis', American Sociological Review34(3): 335-52.
18.
Davis, James A. (1994) `What's Wrong with Sociology?'. Sociological Forum9(2): 179-97.
19.
Dogan, Mattei & Robert Pahre (1989) `Fragmentation and Recombination of the Social Sciences', Studies in Comparative International Development24(2): 56-73.
20.
Dogan, Mattei & Robert Pahre (1990) `Scholarly Reputation and Obsolescence in the Social Sciences', International Social Science Journal42(3(125)): 417-27.
21.
Duque, Ricardo B., Marcus Ynalvez, R. Sooryamoorthy, Paul Mbatia, Dan-Bright S. Dzorgbo & Wesley Shrum (2005) `Collaboration Paradox: Scientific Productivity, the Internet, and Problems of Research in Developing Areas', Social Studies of Science35(3): 755-85.
22.
Gieryn, Thomas (1978) `Problem Retention and Problem Change in Science' , Sociological Inquiry48: 96-115.
23.
Guetzkow, Joshua, Michele Lamont & Gergiore Mallard (2004) `What Is Originality in the Humanities and the Social Sciences?', American Sociological Review69(2): 190-212.
24.
Hackett, Edward J. (2005) `Essential Tensions: Identity, Control, and Risk in Research', Social Studies of Science35(5): 787-826.
25.
Hagstrom, Warren (1965) The Scientific Community (New York: Basic Books).
26.
Hara, Noriko, Paul Solomon, Seung-Lye Kim & Diane H. Sonnenwald (2003) `An Emerging View of Scientific Collaboration', Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology54(10): 952-65.
27.
Hudson, John (1996) `Trends in Multi-authored Papers in Economics' , Journal of Economic Perspectives10(3): 153-58.
28.
Jacobs, Jerry A. (ed.) (2004) ` One Hundred ASR Papers and Counting', American Sociological Review Online Research Note. Available at: < www.2.asanet.org/journals/asr/2004/100theme.pdf>, accessed 1 November 2007.
29.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press ).
30.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1977) The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press).
31.
Leahey, Erin (2007) `Conceptual Metaphors and Empirical Leaps: Measuring Scientific Innovation and Its Impact'. Department of Sociology, University of Arizona. Unpublished manuscript.
32.
Martin-Sempere, Maria Jose, Jesus Rey-Rocha & Belen Garzon-Garcia (2002) `The Effect of Team Consolidation on Research Collaboration and Performance of Scientists: A Case Study of Spanish University Researchers in Geology', Scientometrics55(3): 377-94.
33.
McKelvey, Maureen, Khakan Alm & Massimo Riccaboni (2003) `Does Co-Location Matter for Formal Knowledge Collaboration in the Swedish Biotechnology-Pharmaceutical Sector?' Research Policy32: 483-501.
34.
Melin, Göran. (2000) `Pragmatism and Self-Organization: Research Collaboration on the Individual Level', Research Policy29: 31-40.
35.
Merton, Robert K. (1973) The Sociology of Science (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press).
36.
Moody, James (2004) `The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999', American Sociological Review69(2): 213-38.
37.
Mullins, Nicholas C. (1973) Theories and Theory Groups in Contemporary American Sociology (New York:Harper & Row).
38.
Mullins, Nicholas C. (1983) `Theories and Theory Groups Revisited', Sociological Theory1: 319-37.
39.
Muthén, Bengt O. (2001) `Latent Variable Mixture Modeling', in G.A. Marcoulides & R.E. Schumacker (eds), New Developments and Techniques in Structural Equation Modeling (LawrenceEarlbaum Associates): 1-33.
40.
Pontille, David (2006) `Authorship Practices and Institutional Contexts in Sociology: Elements for a Comparison of the United States and France', Science, Technology, and Human Values28: 217-43.
41.
Presser, Stanley (1980) `Collaboration and the Quality of Research', Social Studies of Science10: 95-101.
42.
Price, Derek de Solla (1963) Little Science, Big Science … And Beyond (New York: Columbia University Press).
43.
Price, Derek de Solla & D.B. Beaver (1966) `Collaboration in an Invisible College', American Psychologist21(1): 1011-18.
44.
Stinchcombe, Arthur (1994) `Disintegrated Disciplines and the Future of Sociology' , Sociological Forum9(2): 279-91.
45.
Turner, Stephen Park & Jonathan H. Turner (1990) The Impossible Science: An Institutional Analysis of American Sociology (Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications).
46.
Wenger, Etienne (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
47.
Wray, K. Brad (2005) `Rethinking Scientific Specialization', Social Studies of Science35(1): 151-64.
