The American Sociologist

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 96–112 | Cite as

Knowledge production and the public interest

  • Barbara Schneider
  • David Schalliol
  • Sarah Makela
  • Sarah-Kathryn McDonald


National Research Council Citation Count American Sociological Review Public Sociology Study Committee 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbott, Andrew. 2001. Chaos of Disciplines. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
  2. Allison, Paul D., Scott I Long, and Tad K. Krauze. 1982. “Cumulative Advantage and Inequality in Science.” American Sociological Review 41: 615–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Anthropological Association. 1986. Statement on Ethics: Principles of Professional Responsibility. Accessed December 12, 2005 ( Google Scholar
  4. American Educational Research Association. 2004. Ethical Standards. Accessed December 12, 2005 (http:/ id=l 75). Google Scholar
  5. American Psychological Association. 2002. Ethics Code. Accessed December 12,2005 ( ethics/). Google Scholar
  6. American Political Science Association. 1998. A Guide to Professional Ethics in Political Science, Second Edition. Accessed December 12, 2005 ( Google Scholar
  7. American Sociological Association. 2005. Code of Ethics Standards. Accessed December 12, 2005 (http:/ / Google Scholar
  8. Babchuk, N., B. Keith, and G. Peters. 1999. “Collaboration in Sociology and Other Scientific Disciplines: A Comparative Trend Analysis of Scholarship in the Social, Physical, and Mathematical Sciences.” The American Sociologist 30: 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burawoy, Michael. 2005. “2004 Presidential Address: For Public Sociology.” American Sociological Review 70(1): 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell Collaboration. 2006. About the Campbell Collaboration. Accessed April 20, 2006 (http:// Google Scholar
  11. Cheek, Dennis, Dorothy De Moya, and Amanda Sowden. 2005. The Campbell Collaboration and The American Institutes for Research are Joining Forces. Press Release. Accessed June 29, 2006 (http:// Google Scholar
  12. Cochrane Collaboration. 2006. Newcomers’ Guide. Accessed April 10, 2006 ( docs/newcomersguide.htm). Google Scholar
  13. Crane, Diana. 1969. “Social Structure in a Group of Scientists: A Test of the ‘Invisible College’ Hypothesis.” American Sociological Review 34(3): 335–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davies, Philip. 2004. “Systematic Reviews and the Campbell Collaboration.” In Gary Thomas and Richard Pring, eds., Evidence-Based Practice in Education. (Maidenhead, Berkshire, England: Open University Press).Google Scholar
  15. Diamond, Arthur M. Jr. 1986. “What Is a Citation Worth?” The Journal of Human Resources 21(2):200–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Enders, Walter, and Gary A. Hoover. 2004. “Whose Line Is It? Plagiarism in Economics.” Journal of Economic Literature 42(2): 487–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Endersby, James W. 1996. “Collaborative Research in the Social Sciences: Multiple Authorship and Publication Credit.” Social Science Quarterly 77(2): 375–392.Google Scholar
  18. Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre. 2006. About the EPPI-Centre’s Work in Education. Retrieved June 19, 2006 ( about.htm). Google Scholar
  19. Fisher, Bonnie S., Craig T. Cobane, Thomas M. Vander Ven, and Francis T. Cullen. 1998. “Trends and Patterns in Political Science.” Political Science Online: 847–856.Google Scholar
  20. Jacobs, Jerry A. 2005. Further Reflections on ASR ’s Greatest Hits. Online Appendix Supplement to article in American Sociological Review, 2004, Vol. 70 (February: 1-3).Google Scholar
  21. Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. (New York: Pergamon Press).Google Scholar
  22. Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  23. Laband, D. N. ÄTollison, R.D. 2000. “Intellectual Collaboration.” Journal of Political Economy 108:632–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lagemann, Ellen Condliffe. 2002. Usable Knowledge in Education: A Memorandum for the Spencer Foundation Board of Directors. Retrieved April 26, 2006 ( usable_knowledge_report_ecl_a.htm). Google Scholar
  25. Latour, Bruno, & Woolgar, Steve. 1979. Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications).Google Scholar
  26. Merton, Robert K. 1957. “Priorities in Scientific Discovery: A Chapter in the Sociology of Science.” American Sociological Review 22(6): 635–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Merton, Robert K. 1968. “The Matthew Effect in Science.” Science 159(3810): 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Moody, James. 2004. “The Structure of a Social Science Collaboration Network: Disciplinary Cohesion from 1963 to 1999.” American Sociological Review 69(2): 213–238.Google Scholar
  29. The National Academies. 2006. The National Research Council Process. Retrieved April 25, 2006 (http:/ html).Google Scholar
  30. National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research. 1996. A Review of the Literature on Dissemination and Knowledge Utilization. Retrieved April 20, 2006 ( review/index, html). Google Scholar
  31. National Research Council (U.S.). 2001a. Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. J. Kilpatrick, J. Swafford, and B. Findell (eds.) Mathematics Learning Study Committee. Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences in Education. (Washington D.C.: National Academy Press).Google Scholar
  32. National Research Council (U.S.). 2001 b. Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment. Committee on the Foundations of Assessment. J. Pelligrino, N. Chudowsky, and R. Glaser (eds.). Board on Testing and Assessment. Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences in Education. (Washington D.C.: National Academy Press).Google Scholar
  33. National Research Council (U.S.). 2002. Scientific Research in Education. Committee on Scientific Principles for Education Research. R.J. Shavelson and L. Towne (eds.). Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  34. National Research Council (U.S.). 2006. The National Research Council. Retrieved June 18, 2006 (http:// Google Scholar
  35. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Population. 2006. About CPOP. Retrieved June 18, 2006 ( Scholar
  36. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Research in Education. 2004. Advancing Scientific Research in Education. Committee on Research in Education; Lisa Towne, Lauress L. Wise, and Tina M. Winters, (eds.). (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press).Google Scholar
  37. Schneider, Barbara, Sarah-Kathyrn McDonald, Kevin L. Brown, David Schalliol, Sarah Makela, Kohki Yamaguchi, DemetriaT. Proutsos, Michelle Llosa, Lisa Hoogstra, and Paula Chu. 2005. Evaluating the Efficacy of the Center for Education at the National Academies: Report to the Center for Education. (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago).Google Scholar
  38. Social Science Research Council. 2006. About the SSRC. Retrieved June 29, 2006 ( inside/about/). Google Scholar
  39. Starr, Mark & Chalmers, Iain. 2003. The Evolution of The Cochrane Library. 1988-2003. Oxford: Update.Google Scholar
  40. Software. Retrieved April 27, 2006 ( Google Scholar
  41. Thomson Scientific. 2005. Social Sciences Citation Index?. Retrieved between January and July 2005 ( Google Scholar
  42. U.S. Department of Education. 2002. U.S. Department of Education Awards Contract for “What Works Clearinghouse.” Retrieved June 19, 2006 ( 08072002a.html). Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Transaction Publishers 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Schneider
  • David Schalliol
  • Sarah Makela
  • Sarah-Kathryn McDonald

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations