The Sociology of Science and Emotions

  • John N. ParkerEmail author
  • Edward J. Hackett
Part of the Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research book series (HSSR)


The sociology of emotions and the sociology of science arose concurrently (circa 1975-present), but connections between these subfields have been rare. Existing research pleads for greater integration and contextualization. This chapter synthesizes and critically assesses eight decades of research on emotional aspects of science. Taken together, extant literature indicates that emotions pervade science as a practice, profession and social institution. Emotions support the ability to perceive and observe empirical patterns and relationships, and to make specific types of knowledge claims. They are elemental facets of scientists’ career evaluations and work life, and their influence on the research process informs and consequentially impacts the form and content of scientific knowledge. Collective emotional states and affective relationships are also essential for scientific collaboration and for fomenting large-scale collective action in the form of scientific social movements. Finally, emotions gave original impetus to science as a distinctive social institution, and continue to support it by acting as agents of social control in the scientific community. Overall, research on emotions and science is rapidly emerging as a generative area of research in its own right, and has the potential to significantly advance general sociology.


Emotions Science Observation Collaboration Scientific social movements Coherent groups 


  1. Altheide, D. L. (1977). The Sociology of Alfred Schultz. In Existential Sociology, edited by Jack Douglas and John M. Johson. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barbalet, J. (2002). Science and emotions. In J. Barbalet (Ed.), Emotions and sociology (pp. 132–150). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Barbalet, J. (2009). Consciousness, emotions, and science. In D. Hopkins, H. Kuzmics, H. Flam, & J. Klreres (Eds.), Theorizing emotions: Sociological explanations and applications (pp. 39–72). Frankfurt: Camus.Google Scholar
  4. Barbalet, J. (2011). Emotions beyond regulation: Backgrounded emotions in science and trust. Emotion Review, 3(1), 36–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Berkshire: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bloch, C. (2002). Managing the emotions of competition and recognition in academia. In J. Barbalet (Ed.), Emotions and sociology (pp. 113–131). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Bloch, C. (2012). Passion and paranoia: Emotions and the culture of emotion in academia. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  8. Bourdieu, P. (1990). Homo academicus. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Burke, P. J., & Stets, J. E. (1999). Trust and commitment through self-verification. Social Psychology Quarterly, 62(4), 347–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Camic, C., & Gross, N. (2008). The new sociology of ideas. In J. R. Blau (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to sociology (pp. 236–249). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Coleman, J. S. (1968). Review of: Studies in ethnomethodology. American Sociological Review, 33(1), 126–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coleman, S. R., & Mehlman, S. E. (1992). An empirical update (1969–1989) of D. L. Krantz’s thesis that the experimental analysis of behavior is isolated. The Behavior Analyst, 15, 43–39.Google Scholar
  13. Collins, R. (1975). Conflict sociology: Toward an explanatory science. New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  14. Collins, R. (1998). The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Collins, R. (2000). The sociology of philosophies: A précis. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 30, 157–201.Google Scholar
  16. Collins, R. (2002). On the acromoniousness of intellectual disputes. Common Knowledge, 8(1), 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Corte, U. (2013). A refinement of collaborative circles theory: Resource mobilization and innovation in an emerging sport. Social Psychology Quarterly, 76(1), 25–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  19. Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York, NY: GP Putnam–s Sons.Google Scholar
  20. Descartes, R. (1960). Meditations on First Philosophy. Pearson.Google Scholar
  21. Douglas, J. D. (1970). Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction of sociological knowledge. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
  22. Douglas, J. D., & Johnson, J. M. (1977). Existential sociology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Durkheim, E. ([1915]/2001). The elementary forms of religious life. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  24. Edmonds, D., & Edinow, J. (2005). Wittgenstein’s poker: The story of a ten-minute argument between two great philosophers. London: Faber and Faber.Google Scholar
  25. Farrell, M. P. (2001). Collaborative circles: Friendship dynamics and creative work. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Fine, G. A. (1979). Small groups and culture creation: The idioculture of little league baseball teams. American Sociological Review, 44(5), 733–745.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fine, G. A. (2012). Tiny Publics: A Theory of Group Action and Culture. New York: Russell Sage Foundation Publications.Google Scholar
  28. Fine, G. A. (2014). The Hing: Civil Society, Group Culture, and the Interaction Order. Social Psychology Quarterly. 77(1), 5–26.Google Scholar
  29. Fleck, L. ([1935a]/1981). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  30. Fleck, L. ([1935b]/1986). Scientific observation and perception in general. In R. S. Cohen & T. Schnelle (Eds.), Cognition and fact: Materials on Ludwick Fleck (pp. 59–78). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  31. Fleck, L. ([1936]/1986). The problem of epistemology. In R. S. Cohen & T. Schnelle (Eds.), Cognition and fact: Materials on Ludwick Fleck (pp. 79–112). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  32. Fleck, L. ([1947]/1986). To look, to see, to know. In R. S. Cohen & T. Schnelle (Eds.), Cognition and fact: Materials on Ludwick Fleck (pp. 129–152). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  33. Fligstein, N., & McAdam, D. (2012). A theory of fields. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Frickel, S., & Gross, N. (2005). A general theory of scientific/intellectual movements. American Sociological Review, 70(2), 204–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Goodfield, J. (1981). An imagined world. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  36. Goodstein, D. L. (1995). After the big crunch. The Wilson Quarterly (1976- ), 19(3), 53–60.Google Scholar
  37. Goodstein, D. L. (2000) In defense of Robert Andrews Millikan. Engineering and Science, 4, 31–37.Google Scholar
  38. Gouldner, A. W. (1965). Enter Plato. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  39. Griffith, B., & Mullins, N. C. (1972). Coherent groups in scientific change: “Invisible Colleges” may be consistent throughout science. Science, 177, 959–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gross, N. (2002). Becoming a Pragmatist Philosopher: Status, Self-Concept, and Intellectual Choice. American Sociological Review 67, 52–76.Google Scholar
  41. Hackett, E. J. (1990). Science as a vocation in the 1990s: The changing organizational culture of academic science. The Journal of Higher Education, 61(3), 241–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hackett, E. J. (1994). A social control perspective on scientific misconduct. The Journal of Higher Education, 65(3), 242–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Hackett, E. J. (2005). Essential tensions: Identity, control and risk in research. Social Studies of Science, 35(5), 787–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hagstrom, W. O. (1965). The scientific community. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  45. Hampton, S. H., & Parker, J. N. (2011). Collaboration and productivity in scientific synthesis. BioScience, 61(11), 900–910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hermanowicz, J. C. (2003). Scientists and satisfaction. Social Studies of Science, 33(1), 45–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hermanowicz, J. C. (2005). Scientists and self-doubt across strata of academic science. Research in Higher Education, 46(3), 309–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hermanowicz, J. C. (2012). The sociology of academic careers: Problems and prospects. In M. B. Paulson (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 207–248). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  49. Hoffman, B. & Helen, D. (1973). Einstein: Creator and Rebel. Penguin Group.Google Scholar
  50. Homans, G. C. (1950). The human group. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  51. Hook, E. B. (2002). Prematurity in scientific discovery. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  52. Irwin, K. (2006). Into the Dark Heart of Ethnography: The Lived Ethics and Inequality of Intimate Field Relationships. Qualitative Sociology 25, 199–175.Google Scholar
  53. Jacob, F. ([1987]/1995). The statue within: An autobiography. Plainview: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.Google Scholar
  54. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  55. Jasper, J. M. (2004). A strategic approach to collective action: Looking for agency in social-movement choices. Mobilization, 9, 1–16.Google Scholar
  56. Johnson, J. M. (1975). Doing field research. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  57. Keller, E. F. (1984). Feeling for the organism: The life and work of Barbara McClintock. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  58. Keller, E. F. (1995). Reflections on gender and science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Kleinman, S., & Copp, M. A. (1993). Emotions and fieldwork. New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  61. Krantz, D. L. (1971). The separate worlds of operant and non-operant psychology. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4, 61–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Lamont, M. P. (2009). How professors think: Inside the curious world of academic judgment. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Langumire, I. (1953). Pathological science. Colloquium at The Knolls Research Laboratory.
  64. Li, J. (2010). Intellectual’s political orientations: Towards an analytic sociology. Asian Social Science, 6(12), 3–15.Google Scholar
  65. Long, J. S. & Mary F. F. (1995). Scientific careers: Universalism and particularism. Annual Review of Sociology 21,45–71.Google Scholar
  66. Merton, R. K. ([1938]/1970). Science technology and society in seventeenth century England. New York: Howard Fertig.Google Scholar
  67. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science: The reward and communication systems of science are considered. Science, 159(3810), 56–63.Google Scholar
  68. Merton, R. K. (1969). Behavior patterns of scientists. The American Scholar, 38(2), 197–225.Google Scholar
  69. Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  70. Mitroff, I. 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(4), 579–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Moore, K. (2008). Disrupting science: Social movements, American scientists, and the politics of the military, 1945–1975. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Mullins, N. C. (1972). The development of a scientific specialty: The phage group and the origins of molecular biology. Minerva, 10(1), 51–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mullins, N. C. (1973). Theories and theory groups in contemporary American sociology. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  74. Nasaday, P. (2008). Adaptive co-management and the gospel of resilience. In D. Armitage, F. Berkes, & N. Doubleday (Eds.), Adaptive co-management: Collaboration, learning, and multilevel governance (pp. 208–227). Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
  75. Owen-Smith, J. (2001). Managing laboratory work through skepticism: Processes of evaluation and control. American Sociological Review, 66(3), 427–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Parker, J. N. (2010). Integrating the social into the ecological: Organizational and research group challenges. In J. N. Parker, N. Vermeulen, & B. Penders (Eds.), Collaboration in the new life sciences (pp. 85–109). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  77. Parker, J. N., & Hackett, E. J. (2012). Hot spots and hot moments in scientific collaborations and social movements. American Sociological Review, 77(1), 21–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Parker, J. N., Vermeulen, N., & Penders, B. (2010). Collaboration in the new life sciences. London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  79. Plato. 2007. The Republic. Penguin Classics.Google Scholar
  80. Pentland, A. (2010). Honest Signals: how they shape our world. MIT Press; Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  81. Rose-Greenland, F. (2013). Seeing the unseen: Prospective loading and knowledge forms in archaeological discovery. Qualitative Sociology, 36, 251–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Sawyer, K. (2007). Group genius: The creative power of collaboration. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  83. Scheff, T. J. (1988). Shame and conformity: The deference-emotion system. American Sociological Review, 53(3), 395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Scheff, T. J. (1995). Academic gangs. Crime, Law and Social Change, 23(2), 157–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Scheff, T. J. (1997). Emotions, the social bond, and human reality: Part/whole analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Schleifer, D., & Penders, B. (2011). Food, drugs, and TV: The social study of corporate science. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 36, 431–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Shapin, S. (1995). A social history of truth: Civility and science in seventeenth-century England. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  88. Shapin, S. (2008). The scientific life: A moral history of a late modern vocation. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  89. Shrum, W., Chompalov, I., & Genuth, J. (2001). Trust, conflict and performance in scientific collaborations. Social Studies of Science, 31(5), 681–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Simmel, G. (1955). Conflict and web of group-affiliations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  91. Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Soreanu, R., & Hudson, D. (2008). Feminist scholarship in international relations and the politics of disciplinary emotion. Millennium—Journal of International Studies, 37(1), 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Stahl, F. (2001). Alfred Day Hershey. Biographical memoirs. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  94. Twain, M. (1869). The Innocents Abroad. Hartford: American PublishingGoogle Scholar
  95. Uttal, W. (2007). The immeasurable mind: The real science of psychology. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  96. Weber, M. (1918). Science as a vocation. In C. W. Mills & H. H. Gerth (Eds.), From Max Weber: Essays in sociology (pp. 77–128). New York: Oxford.Google Scholar
  97. Wendt, G. R. (1949). The development of a psychological cult. American Psychologist, 4(10), 426–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Wiley, N. (1994). The semiotic self. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  99. Wuchty, S., Jones, B. F., & Uzzi, B. (2007).The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science, 316(5827), 1036–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arizona State UniversityPhoenixUSA

Personalised recommendations