Given that is chapter is a handbook introduction to Lab studies, it is chalk-full concepts that present lab studies as to how it has been thought through, in connection to the various concerns it addresses. Knorr Cetina, the author of the chapter does so grounding each concept within its larger historical, theoretical or methodical phase or framework that STS and Lab studies are focused on. By doing this she illustrates not just the logic of each concept and framework, but often hinting at what came before and how it was conceived, and changes that each concept brings forth.
To name a few key concepts, it would start with the discourse of lab studies that go beyond the experiment by the very conditions that influence the creation and distribution of scientific knowledge. The second would be the lab as a theoretical notion that reconfigures natural and social states, an approach coupled best with constructivist thought. Finally would be the relation of negotiation and robustness within the very creation and operating of fact.
Sections of the argument:
LABORATORIES ARE DISTINCT FROM EXPERIMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS:
Knorr Cetina reiterates the major 'change' that lab studies bring by differentiating with two preceding areas of study that claim proximity in method and concern. Experiments being the first, Cetina's analysis shows that framing knowledge through it lens is limiting as it draws focus to scientific method and standees, gearing in questions of robustness and history. This takes away from the aspects of knowledge actually created. Lab studies succeed in this regard by shifting focus to conditions rather than standards (while encompassing them). This allows for the tracing of various influences upon knowledge creation which extended outside of the scientific realm, such as political, economic, cultural, etc. As for organization studies, Knorr Cetina argues that a mere organizational analysis is incapable of incorporating the intricate technical and theoretical process within the lab.
. THE LABORATORY AS A THEORETICAL NOTION: THE RECONFIGURATION OF OBJECTS AND SUBJECTS:
In this section, Korr Cetina analysis show's how is a site of ontological reconfiguration. This beginnings at the level of the material objects incorporated relative to the field studied. Knorr Cetina calls the reconfigured material object it's purified version as it is often decoupled from extraneous natural states and processes. Similarly, the 'social order' a term that incorporates the actors within the lab and their social relations amidst themselves and the material processes, is configured in a way to best suite outcomes rather than adhering to authoritative hierarchy and norms. This 'upgrade' as she terms it redefines the occupational understanding of a scientist. Rather than a social designation of authority and role, they are now reconfigured to fit or function as the method they are best trained/experienced, to whatever capacity the lab sees fit.
CONSTRUCTIONISM AND LABORATORY STUDIES:
Knorr Cetina here talks about the constructivist approach it prominence within and upon the field of sociology. She then relates the discussed notions to the filed of lab studies. Steaming from two strains of thought that mark constructivisum, that seeing reality as constructed by cognitional processes (from learning patterns of mind to language practices)or by human labor, lab studies contributes in three ways. First as a sight that bolsters the notions of the perspective itself. This bolstering is complex, dependent on the material field of investigation. The second way is in being illustrating how empirical analysis is dependent on social infrastructural factors. Third, lab studies exemplify the dynamic work and processes that lead to the production and distribution of knowledge. Finally, lab studies reveal the relation that exists between localized bodies of research knowledge that is often seen to be general or universal.
HOW ARE FACTS CONSTRUCTED:
This section is perhaps the most in-depth, delving into the product or rather currency of the lab ie. 'facts' and it relates to the processes of constructionism. Divided into seven subsections, the processes of knowledge creation, consumption and communication are analyzed with the backdrop of scientific robustness that is built into varying objects and stages that make up scientific institutions. The tools, literature, standards of conduct and communication are all shown to be operating as heterogeneous processes.
Taking from this idea of lab studies as 'change', Knorr Cetina's crucial thesis is that there a shift from "the context of justification" to "the context of discovery" which lab studies is emblematic of. Through this Knorr Cetina differentiates lab studies from the study of experiments, which was the main focus in the ''context of justification". Knorr Cetina treats this change as both a drawing of attention to aspects of knowledge hitherto overlooked, and as redrawing of as knowledge convicted and created.
What is key here is that lab studies offer key methodologies that make and sustain such a shift in understanding. Given that this is a chapter introducing lab studies, the method is to trace these methodological features of lab studies systematically and each features epistemic or ontological implications on knowledge. What is of note here is that the lab is a condition of scientific knowledge production and is thus more than the operation principles of an experiment. Thus 'lab' is as much a toll of lab studies as it is the title object.
Karin Knorr Cetina introduces the idea of laboratory studies by framing it in two ways. The first is chronological attribute attached to lab studies, as a discursive perspective, calling it recent. This perspective is thus a 'recent' one with the larger discursive field of STS. The second is more characteristic. Two used phrases are particular here, the first is "direct observation and discourse analysis" and "the root where knowledge is produced". The first phrase is ''methodological", tending towards the "studies" aspect of the title in question. The second is ''locative'', the phrase being qualified a follow up that says " in modern science typically the scientific laboratory". Here the laboratory is likened to the function of knowledge, specifically scientific knowledge. There is a teleological quality or even value given to the lab. A value that is simultaneously social and methodological.
The rest of the sections of the chapter delve deeper into the operation of the characteristics. The point is that the laboratory marks a fundamental 'change' in the working of STS and the understanding of science as a knowledge system in general.