View in EDS

Portfolios of Worth: Capitalizing on Basic and Clinical Problems in Biomedical Research Groups.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Portfolios of Worth: Capitalizing on Basic and Clinical Problems in Biomedical Research Groups.
Authors: Rushforth, Alexander1 alexander.rushforth@phc.ox.ac.uk, Franssen, Thomas2, de Rijcke, Sarah2
Source: Science, Technology & Human Values. Mar2019, Vol. 44 Issue 2, p209-236. 28p.
Subject Terms: Research teams, Medical research
Abstract: How are "interesting" research problems identified and made durable by academic researchers, particularly in situations defined by multiple evaluation principles? Building on two case studies of research groups working on rare diseases in academic biomedicine, we explore how group leaders arrange their groups to encompass research problems that latch onto distinct evaluation principles by dividing and combining work into "basic-oriented" and "clinical-oriented" spheres of inquiry. Following recent developments in the sociology of (e)valuation comparing academics to capitalist entrepreneurs in pursuit of varying kinds of worth, we argue that the metaphor of the portfolio is helpful in analyzing how group leaders manage these different research lines as "alternative investment options" from which they were variously hoping to capitalize. We argue portfolio development is a useful concept for exploring how group leaders fashion "entrepreneurial" practices to manage and exploit tensions between multiple matrices of (e)valuation and conclude with suggestions for how this vocabulary can further extend analysis of epistemic capitalism within science and technology studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Science, Technology & Human Values is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Education Research Complete
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
Header DbId: ehh
DbLabel: Education Research Complete
An: 135308003
AccessLevel: 6
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Portfolios of Worth: Capitalizing on Basic and Clinical Problems in Biomedical Research Groups.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Rushforth%2C+Alexander%22">Rushforth, Alexander</searchLink><relatesTo>1</relatesTo><i> alexander.rushforth@phc.ox.ac.uk</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Franssen%2C+Thomas%22">Franssen, Thomas</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22de+Rijcke%2C+Sarah%22">de Rijcke, Sarah</searchLink><relatesTo>2</relatesTo>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Science%2C+Technology+%26+Human+Values%22">Science, Technology & Human Values</searchLink>. Mar2019, Vol. 44 Issue 2, p209-236. 28p.
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+teams%22">Research teams</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Medical+research%22">Medical research</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: How are "interesting" research problems identified and made durable by academic researchers, particularly in situations defined by multiple evaluation principles? Building on two case studies of research groups working on rare diseases in academic biomedicine, we explore how group leaders arrange their groups to encompass research problems that latch onto distinct evaluation principles by dividing and combining work into "basic-oriented" and "clinical-oriented" spheres of inquiry. Following recent developments in the sociology of (e)valuation comparing academics to capitalist entrepreneurs in pursuit of varying kinds of worth, we argue that the metaphor of the portfolio is helpful in analyzing how group leaders manage these different research lines as "alternative investment options" from which they were variously hoping to capitalize. We argue portfolio development is a useful concept for exploring how group leaders fashion "entrepreneurial" practices to manage and exploit tensions between multiple matrices of (e)valuation and conclude with suggestions for how this vocabulary can further extend analysis of epistemic capitalism within science and technology studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
– Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright
  Label:
  Group: Ab
  Data: <i>Copyright of Science, Technology & Human Values is the property of Sage Publications Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=ehh&AN=135308003
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1177/0162243918786431
    Languages:
      – Code: eng
        Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 28
        StartPage: 209
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Research teams
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Medical research
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Portfolios of Worth: Capitalizing on Basic and Clinical Problems in Biomedical Research Groups.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Rushforth, Alexander
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Franssen, Thomas
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: de Rijcke, Sarah
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 03
              Text: Mar2019
              Type: published
              Y: 2019
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 01622439
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 44
            – Type: issue
              Value: 2
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Science, Technology & Human Values
              Type: main
ResultId 1