Knowledge Once Divided Can Be Hard to Put Together Again

An Epistemological Critique of Collaborative and Team-Based Research Practices

Datos Bibliográficos

ID2321843
AutoresNatasha S Mauthner (University of Aberdeen, autor de correspondencia), A Doucet (0000-0002-6000-9029, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada,, autor de correspondencia)
Año2008
Volumen42
Número5
Páginas971-985
Fecha de publicación2008-10-01
Peer ReviewedSí
Open AccessSí
TipoARTICLE
RevistaSociology (JOURNAL)
Identificadores de la revistaISSN: 0038-0385 • E-ISSN: 1469-8684
EditorialSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0038038508094574
OpenAlexW2114483282
IdiomaEN
Citas recibidas64
Referencias citadas49

This article critically examines team and collaborative research as an 'academic mode of production'. Our main argument is that while theoretically qualitative social science research is rooted within a postfoundational epistemological paradigm, normative team-based research practices embody foundational principles. Team research relies on a division of labour that creates divisions and hierarchies of knowledge, particularly between researchers who gather embodied and contextual knowledge 'in the field' and those who produce textual knowledge 'in the office'. We argue that a theoretical commitment to a postfoundational epistemology demands that we translate this into concrete research practices that rely on concerted team-based relations rather than divisions of labour, and a reflexive research practice that strives to involve all team members in all aspects of knowledge construction processes

Argument (complex analysis) · Division of labour · Embodied cognition · Epistemology · Field (mathematics) · Knowledge management · Knowledge production · Normative · Political science · Reflexivity · Social epistemology · Social science · Sociology · Computer Science · Data Analysis and Archiving · Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration · Law · Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics