Einstein Has Left the Building: Coming to Terms with Post-academic Science

  • Massimiano Bucchi
  • Adrian Belton


“Albert Michelson,1 hearing of Einstein’s confirmation of his findings, strode into the Royal Society in a tight black T-shirt printed with the legend ‘Michelson Rocks’. Contrary to rumour, Michelson has not made a fortune from his shares in, though others have. He sold too late and made only ‘a few million’, he told me, just enough to buy his famous 90-foot yacht.” (Collins 2005:50).


Academic Science Electronic Archive Plos Biology Electronic Communication Medium Press Office 
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.


  1. Barnes, B. (1985). About Science. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  2. Bauer, M. (1998). The medicalization of science news – From the ‘rocket-scalpel’ to the ‘gene-meteorite’ complex’. Social Science Information, 37, 731–751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (1986). Risikogesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  4. Bijker, W. (1995). Of Bycicles, Bakelites and Bulbs. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  5. Borgna, P. (2001). Immagine pubbliche della scienza. Gli Italiani e la ricerca scientifica e tecnologica. Torino: Edizioni di Comunità.Google Scholar
  6. Boyle, J. A. (1996). Shamans, Software, and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brannigan, A. G. (1981). The Social Basis of Scientific Discoveries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brint, S. (2004). Creating the Future: Structures, Sources, and Prospects for the New University Forms, Research Paper, University of California Berkeley.Google Scholar
  9. Bucchi, M. (1998a). Science and the Media. Alternative Routes in Scientific Communication. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Bucchi, M., Mazzolini, R. G. (2003). Big news, little science: science coverage in the Italian Daily Press, 1946–1997. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burnham, J. (1987). How Superstition Won and Science Lost: Popularizing Science and Health in the US. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Butler, D. (1999). The Writing is on Web for Science Journals in Print. Nature, 397, 195–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chemin, A. (2005). La guerre de l’Adn. Le Monde, 21.Google Scholar
  14. Collins, H. M. (2005). Heroes or villains? (Review of Duncan, D. E., The Geneticist who Played Hoops with my DNA). New Scientist, 20 August, 50.Google Scholar
  15. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible Colleges: Diffusion of Knowledge in Scientific Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  16. Danchin, A. (2000). La storia del genoma umano. Internazionale, 341, 30 June 2000, 20–24.Google Scholar
  17. Dell’Oste, C. (2005). Perché non serve fare i ricercatori duri e puri. Il Sole24Ore, Research special, 23 September, 9.Google Scholar
  18. Di Maggio, P., Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eberle, C. (1997). Scienziati in Immagine. Unpublished MA Thesis, Facoltà di Sociologia, Università di Trento.Google Scholar
  20. Epstein, S. (1996). Impure Science: AIDS, Activism and the Politics of Knowledge. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  21. Etzkowitz, H., Webster, A. (1995). Science as intellectual property. In Jasanoff, S. et al. (Eds.) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (480–505). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Eudes, Y. (2002). Le pirates du génome. Le Monde, 18 settembre.Google Scholar
  23. Faulkner, W. (1994). Conceptualizing knowledge used in innovation: A second look at the science-technology distinction and industrial innovation. Science Technology and Human Values, 19(4), 425–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gleick, J. (1992). Genius. The Life and Science of Richard Feynman. New York, NY: Knopf.Google Scholar
  25. Gleick, J. (1999). Faster. The Acceleration of Just About Everything. New York, NY: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  26. Goepfert, W. (2007). The strength of PR and the weakness of science journalism. In Bauer, M., Bucchi, M. (Eds.), Between Journalism and PR: The Changing Scenarios of Science Communication (215–226). London: Routledge,Google Scholar
  27. Hagstrom, W. O. (1982). Gift giving as an organizing principle in science. In Barnes, B., Edge, D. (Eds.) Science in Context (21–34). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Home, R. (1993). Learning from buildings: Laboratory design and the nature of physics. In: Mazzolini, R. G. (Ed.) Non-Verbal Communication in Science Prior to 1900. Firenze: Olschki.Google Scholar
  29. Keller, E. F. (1995). Refiguring Life. Metaphors of Twentieth-Century Biology. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  30. MacLeod, C. (1996). Concepts of Invention and the patent controversy in Victorian Britain. In Fox, R. (Ed.), Technological Change. Methods and Themes in the History of Technology (137–153). Reading, MA: Harwood.Google Scholar
  31. Merriden, T. (2001). Irresistible Forces. The Legacy of Napster and the Growth of the Underground Internet. Oxford: Capstone.Google Scholar
  32. Merton, R. K. (1938a). Science, Technology and Society in Seventeenth-Century England. Bruges: St. Catherine Press (Fourth edition, with a new introduction (2001). New York, NY: Howard Fertig).Google Scholar
  33. Merton, R. K. (1942). The Normative Structure of Science. Reprinted in (1973), The Sociology of Science.Google Scholar
  34. Merton, R. K. (1957). Priorities in Scientific Discovery . Reprinted in (1973), The Sociology of Science.Google Scholar
  35. Mitroff, I. (1974). Norms and counter-norms in a select group of the Apollo moon scientists: A case study of the ambivalence of scientists. American Sociological Review, 39, 579–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nelkin, D. (1994). Promotional metaphors and their popular appeal. Public Understanding of Science, 3, 25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Phillips, D. M. (1991). Importance of the lay press in the transmission of medical knowledge to the scientific community. New England Journal of Medicine, 325, 1180–1183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Pincock, S. (2005). The chemistry of cash. Financial Times Magazine, October 8–9, 10.Google Scholar
  39. Revuelta, G. (1998). The New York Times cures cancer. Quark. Ciencia, Medicina, Comunicación y Cultura, 12, 48–57.Google Scholar
  40. Rossi, P. (1997). La nascita della scienza moderna in Europa. Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
  41. Scanu, M. (2004). Open archives: Rivoluzione o Conservazione? In La comunicazione della scienza (2004), Atti del II Convegno Nazionale di Forlì. Roma: ZadigRoma.Google Scholar
  42. Shiva, V. (2001). Protect or Plunder? Understanding Intellectual Property Rights. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  43. Tallacchini, M. C. (2003). Democratizzazione della scienza e brevetti biotecnologici. In Bernasconi, C., Garagna, S., Milano, G., Redi, C. A., Zuccotti, M. (Eds.) Cellule e genomi (63–84). Ibis: Pavia.Google Scholar
  44. Trench, B. (2008). Internet: Turning science communication inside-out?. In Bucchi, M., Trench, B. (Eds.) Public Communication of Science and Technology Handbook (185–198). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  45. UNCTAD. (2005). World Investment Report, Resource Document, and Scholar
  46. Vos, A. (2003). Censura preventiva. Internazionale, 28 febbraio, 52.Google Scholar
  47. Ward, B. (2007). The Royal Society and the debate on climate change. In Bauer, M. W., Bucchi, M. (Eds.), Journalism, Science and Society. Science Communication Between News and Public Relations (159–172). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  48. Washburn, J. (2005). University, Inc. The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  49. Weber, M. (1922). Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre. Tübingen: Mohr. Translated in English. (1949). The Methodology of the Social Sciences. New York, NY: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
  50. Wilkie, T. (1993). Perilous Knowledge. The Human Genome Project and its Implications. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
  51. Ziman, J. (2000). Real Science. What it is, and what it means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipto. Sociologia e Ricerca SocialeUniversita di TrentoTrentoItaly
  2. 2.Società editrice il MulinoBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations