Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32907509›Full record

ArticleSocial studies of science2021

Science, technology, security: Towards critical collaboration.

Sam Weiss Evans, Matthias Leese, Dagmar Rychnovská

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Social studies of science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Sam Weiss EvansProgram on Science, Technology and Society, John F Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8547-3314
Matthias LeeseCenter for Security Studies, ETH Zurich, Switzerland.
Dagmar RychnovskáInstitute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, Austria.
ETH Zurich · CHHarvard University · USInstitut für Höhere Studien - Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS) · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Science and technology play a central role in the contemporary governance of security, both as tools for the production of security and as objects of security concern. Scholars are increasingly seeking to not only critically reflect on the interplays between science, technology and security, but also engage with the practices of security communities that shape and are shaped by science and technology. To further help this growth of interest in security topics within science and technology studies (STS), we explore possible modes of socio-technical collaboration with security communities of practice. Bringing together literatures from STS and critical security studies, we identify several key challenges to critical social engagement of STS scholars in security-related issues. We then demonstrate how these challenges played out over the course of three case studies from our own experience in engaging security communities of practice. We use these vignettes to show that there is a rich vein of developments in both theory and practice that STS scholars can pursue by attending to the interplay of science, technology and security.

Indexed as

ScienceTechnologySecurity Measurescollaborationcritical security studiesengagementsecurity

Identifiers

PMID32907509
PMCPMC8010893
OpenAlexW3086120660

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.