Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

This paper investigates the directionality of scientific-technological practices, by tracing epistemic imaginaries. These are defined as textual or visual representations of an ideal set of future achievements within a research field. The cases are plasma chemistry and neurodegeneration research.

Paper long abstract

Typically, science and innovation policy aim to guide research directions by offering funding and adding conditions. Often, however, disappointment follows when researchers behave opportunistically, by relabelling their research and by window dressing. This paper has another starting point and asks how directions in scientific-technological practices appear in the first place.

In this paper, I study the directionality of scientific-technological practices by tracing epistemic imaginaries: textual or visual representations of an ideal set of future achievements within a research field. Such future achievements range from ‘holy grails’ of the field to be awarded with a Nobel prize, to generic and mundane assessments of what, realistically, can be expected to be achieved in the near future. Epistemic imaginaries express the aspirational horizons by foregrounding the priorities of knowledge production or by suggesting something is impossible to achieve. I am interested in how these scientific agenda setting processes respond to societal demands and pressures such as an aging population or the climate crisis.

Theoretically, the paper bridges two STS perspectives: the sociology of expectations and studies on epistemic cultures. Empirically, I study the fields of plasma chemistry and neurodegeneration research (which includes studies on Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease). I have traced epistemic imaginaries by (i) interviewing researchers in the field, both established and newcomers; (ii) analysing review articles; (iii) studying agenda-building activities at conferences, such as programs, welcoming lectures, state-of-the-art overviews, (panel) discussions and award ceremonies. The paper concludes with insights into how epistemic imaginaries change, with pathways, stages and mechanisms.