Σύγκριση μεθόδων

	Sociotechnical Imaginaries Analysis	Boundary-Work Analysis
Πεδίο	Science Technology Studies	Science Technology Studies
Οικογένεια	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Έτος προέλευσης	2009	1983
Δημιουργός	Sheila Jasanoff & Sang-Hyun Kim	Thomas F. Gieryn
Τύπος	Qualitative interpretive and comparative method	Qualitative rhetorical and interpretive method
Θεμελιώδης πηγή	Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2009). Containing the atom: sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva, 47(2), 119-146.	Gieryn, T. F. (1983). Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781-795.
Εναλλακτικές ονομασίες	Sociotechnical imaginary analysis, Imaginaries of science and technology, Visions of desirable futures analysis	Boundary-work analysis, Demarcation analysis, Credibility contest analysis
Συναφείς	4	4
Σύνοψη	Sociotechnical imaginaries analysis studies the collectively held, institutionally stabilised, and publicly performed visions of desirable futures that societies attach to science and technology. Introduced by Sheila Jasanoff and Sang-Hyun Kim in their 2009 comparison of nuclear power in the United States and South Korea, the concept treats imaginaries as more than rhetoric: they are co-produced with the material and political order, shaping how technologies are designed, governed, and lived. The method reconstructs these visions from public discourse, traces how they become embedded in institutions and policy, and compares how the same technology animates different imaginaries across nations or eras.	Boundary-work analysis studies how the line between science and non-science is drawn, defended, and contested—not by philosophers laying down timeless criteria, but by actors doing rhetorical work to secure authority, resources, and credibility. Introduced by Thomas Gieryn in 1983 and elaborated in his 1999 book Cultural Boundaries of Science, the approach treats demarcation as a practical, strategic, and historically variable accomplishment. The method examines the discourse of demarcation episodes to reveal the strategies—expansion, expulsion, and protection of autonomy—through which the cultural map of science is redrawn whenever its credibility is on the line.