Naturalizing the essential tension

Kuhn’s “essential tension” between conservative and innovative imperatives in enquiry has an empirical analogue—between the potential benefits of collectivization of enquiry and the social dynamic impediments to effective sharing of information and insights in collective settings. A range of empirical materials from social psychology and organization theory are considered which bear on the issue of balancing these opposing forces and an institution is described in which they are balanced in a way which is appropriate for collective knowledge production.

[1]  J. Watkins.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Against ‘Normal Science’ , 1970 .

[2]  J. Payne.  Organizational decision making: The scarecrow's search: A cognitive psychologist's perspective on organizational decision making , 1996 .

[3]  N. Kerr,et al.  Bias in judgment: Comparing individuals and groups. , 1996 .

[4]  Cass R. Sunstein,et al.  Why Societies Need Dissent , 2005 .

[5]  William R. Shadish,et al.  The Social Psychology of Science , 1995 .

[6]  Martin Kusch,et al.  Knowledge by Agreement: The Programme of Communitarian Epistemology , 2002 .

[7]  H. Guetzkow,et al.  A social psychology of group processes for decision-making , 1964 .

[8]  F. D’Agostino,et al.  Two conceptions of reason , 2006 .

[9]  F. D’Agostino.  Incommensurability and Commensuration , 2018 .

[10]  P. Kitcher.  The Advancement of Science , 1993 .

[11]  I. Lakatos.  Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1976 .

[12]  E. Wenger.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[13]  James G. March,et al.  Organizational decision making: Understanding how decisions happen in organizations , 1996 .

[14]  Robert E. Goodin,et al.  The Theory of Institutional Design , 1998 .

[15]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Group creativity : An introduction , 2003 .

[16]  M. Polanyi.  Chapter 7 – The Tacit Dimension , 1997 .

[17]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The essential tension : selected studies in scientific tradition and change , 1977 .

[18]  F. D’Agostino.  The aimless rationality of science1 , 1990 .

[19]  Terri L. Griffith,et al.  The phenomenology of conflict in virtual work teams , 2002 .

[20]  I. Lakatos,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1970 .

[21]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  Distributed Work , 2002 .

[22]  A. Goldman.  Knowledge in a Social World , 1999 .

[23]  E. Hippel.  Sticky Information and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation , 1994 .

[24]  M. S. Poole,et al.  Communication and Group Decision-Making , 1986 .

[25]  Donelson R. Forsyth,et al.  Social Comparison and Influence in Groups , 2000 .

[26]  H. Longino.  The Fate of Knowledge , 2001 .

[27]  Frederick F. Schmitt.  Socializing Epistemology: The Social Dimensions of Knowledge , 1994 .

[28]  A. Chandler,et al.  The dynamic firm : the role of technology, strategy, organization, and regions , 1999 .

[29]  Stephen A. Marglin,et al.  Knowledge and Power , 1984 .

[30]  L. Laudan,et al.  Dominance and the Disunity of Method: Solving the Problems of Innovation and Consensus , 1989, Philosophy of Science.

[31]  Organizational decision making: Naturalistic decision making and the new organizational context , 1996 .

[32]  C. Cramton.  Attribution in distributed work groups. , 2002 .

[33]  Matthew J. Grawitch,et al.  Individual and Group Affect in Problem-Solving Workgroups , 2005 .

[34]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge , 1972 .

[35]  Susan C. Stokes,et al.  Democracy, Accountability, and Representation: Subject Index , 1999 .

[36]  Serge Moscovici,et al.  Toward A Theory of Conversion Behavior , 1980 .

[37]  I. Steiner.  Group process and productivity , 1972 .

[38]  H. Simon,et al.  Economics, Bounded Rationality and the Cognitive Revolution , 1992 .

[39]  Kuhn's Risk-Spreading Argument and the Organization of Scientific Communities , 2005, Episteme.

[40]  Verlin B. Hinsz,et al.  The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. , 1997, Psychological bulletin.

[41]  Johan P. Olsen,et al.  Ambiguity and choice in organizations , 1976 .

[42]  G. Stasser,et al.  Group Creativity and Collective Choice , 2019, The Oxford Handbook of Group Creativity and Innovation.

[43]  David J. Teece,et al.  Design Issues for Innovative Firms: Bureaucracy, Incentives and Industrial Structure * , 1999 .

[44]  Pamela J. Hinds,et al.  What Do We Know about Proximity and Distance in Work Groups? A Legacy of Research , 2002 .

[45]  P. Kitcher.  Science, Truth, and Democracy , 2001 .

[46]  Richard Rorty,et al.  Philosophy as Cultural Politics , 2007 .

[47]  Philip Kitcher,et al.  The Division of Cognitive Labor , 1990 .

[48]  P. Bourdieu.  Forms of Capital , 2002 .

[49]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Minority dissent and team innovation: the importance of participation in decision making. , 2001, The Journal of applied psychology.

[50]  T. Broadbent,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge , 1972 .

[51]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. , 1964 .

[52]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[53]  F. D’Agostino.  Incommensurability and commensuration: lessons from (and to) ethico-political theory , 2000 .

[54]  K. Popper,et al.  The Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1960 .

[55]  Brian R. Taylor.  The pooling of unshared information during group discussion , 1987 .

[56]  M. Sbisà.  TWO CONCEPTIONS OF RATIONALITY IN GRICE'S THEORY OF IMPLICATURE 1 , 2003 .

[57]  F. Hayek.  The economic nature of the firm: The use of knowledge in society , 1945 .

[58]  Zur Shapira,et al.  Organizational decision making: Preference processing , 1996 .

[59]  S. Günzel.  Nietzsche's Geophilosophy , 2003 .

[60]  Jerry Suls,et al.  Handbook of social comparison : theory and research , 2000 .