Koncepcja obiektu granicznego – idea, zastosowania, perspektywy

  • Izabela Bukalska Instytut Socjologii UKSW, Warszawa
Słowa kluczowe: obiekt graniczny, społeczne światy, socjologia nauki, metodologia teorii ugruntowanej


The purpose of the article is an in-depth analysis of the boundary object conception introduced by J. Griesemer and S. L. Star. An attempt to describe it according to the idea of the authors and to investigate its initial sense is necessary. The author was induced to carry out such an analysis having noticed numerous simplifications and instances of superficial treatment of the issue in manifold studies referring to this idea. The article begins with a definition of the boundary object according to the seminal text of Griesemer and Star. Secondly, it points out the areas of the conception’s application illustrated with examples. In the next step, the author focuses on the cases of inconsequence in the studies using the concept, mainly in relation to Star’s comments. A possibility of intentional creation of boundary objects is also referred to, as it was from the beginning incorporated in the authors’ intention.


Berg M., Goormann E. (2000), Modelling nursing activities: electronic patient records and their discontents, Nursing Inquiry, 7, 1, s. 9.

Bilski P. (2009), Rolnictwo Ekologiczne jako zawód I powołanie, Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej,Monografie 5, 3.

Bowker G., Star S. L. (1997) Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Callon M. (1986) Some elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay’, w: J. Law red., Power, Action and Belief, London, Routledge, s.196-223.

Davenport E , Bruce I. (2002) Innovation, knowledge management and the use of space: questioning assumptions about non-traditional office work, Journal of Information Science, 28 3, 225-230.

Fleischmann K. R. (2006), Boundary Objects with Agency: A Method for Studying Design- Use Interface, Information Society, 222, 77-87.

Fujimura J.(1988) The Molecular Biological Bandwagon. Where Social Worlds Meet. “The Social Problems” 35, s. 261-283.

Ghatak S (2005), The Menace of the Feebleminded”: Defective Deliquents at the Boundary of Science and Law, Referaty Konferencyjne - American Sociological Association, 2005 Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, s. 1-22, dostępne na: http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/2/3/2/5/pages23252/p23252-1.php [9 listopada 2014]

Gieryn T. (1983), Boundary Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non- Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists, American Sociological Review 48 , 6, 781-795.

Griesemer J. R., Star S.L.(1989) Institutional Ecology, ‘Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907- 39. “Social Studies of Science”, vol. 19, s. 387-420.

Guston D. H (2004) Stabilizing the Boundary between US Politics and Science: The Role of the Office of Technology Transfer as a Boundary Organization, Social Studies of Science, 29 1 s. 87-111

Halfon S. (2006) Disunity od Consensus: International Population Policy Coordination as Socio- Technical Practice. “Social Studies of Science”, vol. 36, s.783- 807.

Hara N., Shachaf P.,. Hew K.F (2010)Cross- Cultural Analysis of The Wikipedia Community, Journal of the American Society for Information Scienc and technology, 61 10 s. 2097-2108.

Henderson K. (1991), Flexible Sketches and Inflexible Data Bases: Visual Communication, Conscription Devices, and Boundary Objects in Design Engineering, Science, Technology and Human Values, 16,4, 448-473.

Kacperczyk A. (2006), Wsparcie społeczne w instytucjach opieki paliatywnej, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego.

Kacperczyk A. (2012) Obiekt graniczny, w: Słownik Socjologii Jakościowej, Engram Warszawa 2012, s. 192.

Kellogg K., Orlikowski W.J., Yates J. (2006) Life in the Trading Zone: Structuring Coordination Across Boundaries in Postbureaucratic Organizations, Organization Science, 171, s. 22-44

Konecki K. T. (2010) W stronę socjologii jakościowej: badanie kultur, subkultur i światów społecznych [w:] Jacek Leoński i Magdalena Fiternicka-Gorzko (red.) Kultury, subkultury i światy społeczne w badaniach jakościowych, Szczecin: Volumina.pl.

Lainer- Vos D. (2012) Manufacturing national attachments: gift- giving, market exchange and the construction of Irish and Zionist diaspora bonds. “Theor Soc”, vol. 41, s. 73- 106.

Latour B. (1987) Science in Action, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Locke J.,. Lowe A (2007) A Biography: Fabrications in the Life of an ERP Package, Organization, 146, 793-814.

Ribeiro R. (2007), The Language barrier a an Aid to Communication, Social Studies of Science 37 4, s. 561-584.

Shanahan M.C.(2011) Science blogs as boundary layers: Creating and understanding new writer and reader interactions through science blogging, Journalism, Sage,12 7 s. 903-919

Schneider A. L. (2009)Why do Some Boundary Organizations Result in New Ideas and Practices and Others only Meet Resistance? Examples From Juvenile Justice, The American Review of Public Administration, 391: 60-79.

Słowińska K (2010) Społeczny świat hodowców gołębi pocztowych, Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej, Mongrafie 4, 3.

Star S.L. (2010), This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept. “Science Technology Human Values” vol. 35 s.601-617.

Strauss A. L.(1978) Social Worlds Perspective, “Studies in Symbolic Interaction” 1, s. 119- 128.

Trompette P., Vinck D. (2009), Revisiting the notion of Boundary Object, “Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances “, vol. 3, 3-25. [dostęp 30 grudnia 2013]. Dostępny w Internecie: http://www.cairn.info/article.php?ID_ARTICLE=RAC_006_0003.

------ (2010) Back to the notion of a boundary object, “Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances “, vol. 4, s. i-m, [dostęp 30 grudnia 2013]. Dostępny w Internecie: http://www.cairn.info/article.php?ID_ARTICLE=RAC_009_00ii.

Vaughan D., NASA Revisited: Theory, Analogy, and Public Sociology, American Journal of Sociology, 112 (2006) 2, s. 353-393.

Weathers Jo G. (2005), Argentina and Chile: Politics and Fronteras in Geographies of Gender and Nation, praca doktorska, [dostęp 30 grudnia 2013] Dostępny w Internecie na: http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/1738/1/umi-umd-1711.pdf.

Zachry M. (2008), An Interview with Susan Leigh Star, “Technical Communication Quarterly”, vol. 17, s. 435-454.

Z problematyki społeczno-pedagogicznej