AO: Cerwonka highlights how the political scientists viewed her project as “somewhat literary?” and how the book emerged in part to “justify my process of knowledge production to
AO: Cerwonka writes: “one of my motivations for collaborating with Liisa on this book was my sense that as more and more scholars undertake interdisciplinary work, they face
AO: The analysts do not explicitly note this but as Somatosphere’s Editorial Collaborative, they write to discuss the collective work it takes to run and organize their online
“international (trans-national) institutional co-authorship from a select database from 1981 - 86 that looks at Earth and space, Math, Physics, Biomedicine; Biology; Chemistry;...Read more
AO: Analysts are concerned with how “digital technologies might facilitate bad or inappropriate editorial practices—and how they might also be harnessed to refuse or resist such
AO: The authors appear to grow out of a dependency theory mindset arguing: “A closer analysis of the collaborative patterns of individual countries also points to relations of
AO: The analysts seem to largely see themselves as equal and non-heirarchical. They describe themselves (middle aged, academic feminists with diverse sexual orientations over time).
AO: They do not discuss this as much but the correspondence was largely only possible because of Internet and email. These are largely like letter correspondence previously (between...Read more
AO: The authors focus primarily on meso level analysis given that their focus on institutional co-authorship. They lack any sort of nano or micro level analysis and mention legal and
AO: Their data is the email correspondence between Malkki (member of committee) and Cerwonka as she was in Australia for her fieldwork. They used the emails in a class (taught at UCI
