AO: The analysts heavily cite a 1994 article by Lopes in the “Annual Review of Psychology” that argued that psychologists and economists view one another with suspicion and distaste to...Read more
AO: The analyst calls into question the viability of and the kind of ethnographic knowledge that a “detached researcher” who enters the field and pretends not to define their
AO: The analyst notes complaints that went to AAA against unethical practice by some anthropologists in the field which led to reports against that individual.
AO: Editors are responding to binaries of political vs scholarship (academia vs direct advocacy) to argue that such reductions are ill-fitted to the complexities of the world. Editors...Read more
AO: Fortun and Cherkasky note that collaboration “draws people with different interests, perspectives and skills into synchronized effort to accomplish something that could not be...Read more
AO: The editors note that the most difficult demand is to speak within the language and logic of particular institutional spaces (e.g. the court room, mainstream press, etc.). The spaces do...Read more
AO: The analysts propose six theoretical perspectives to explain and examine collaborative behavior: resource dependence, corporate social performance/institutional
AO: The editors explicitly call the diversity within direct advocacy organizations as “collaboration” rather than collegiality or solidarity (which connote sameness of those who work...Read more
AO: Citing Kelty, the analyst calls collaboration: “mutifaceted and rhizomic” and asks if it could be too weak of a word to describe the entanglements of complicity, cultural
AO: the analysts argue that psychology and economics are merging into a new single, distinct perspective (economic-psychology). They argue that it is becoming a collaborative field
