5/ 📚 This paper aims to spark urgent discussion about methods in STS—especially for sociotechnical futures.
Interested in performativity, imaginaries & methodological rigor? Read & engage!👇
t.co/fgXLSPpHJF
4/ 💡 We offer practical strategies to strengthen empirical work on the future:
✅ Data triangulation
✅ Comparative designs
✅ Clear inference practices
✅ Better interview structure
3/ 🧰 We designed an appraisal tool for qualitative studies, grounded in recent sociological debates.
It helps diagnose methodological gaps and provides actionable recommendations.
2/ 🧪 From a universe of 1,400+ publications, we reviewed 139 empirical STS articles on the future.
We found:
⚠️ Poor methodological reporting
⚠️ Unjustified inferences
⚠️ Lack of triangulation or comparative design
1/ 🚀 How do we study the future in Science and Technology Studies (STS)?
Our new paper, w/ Iván Ojeda and Fernando Campos, opens the methodological black box of future-oriented research. Spoiler: there's much work to do
🔍 Insights, gaps & proposals 👇
t.co/q0Q3TgMVkg
Me honra profundamente contarles que fui seleccionado para la Beca Chile Doctorado 2025 y cursaré mi DPhil en Antropología en la Universidad de Oxford desde octubre 2025 🇨🇱🇬🇧Gracias a quienes me han apoyado. Espero próntamente devolver esta oportunidad al país al que le debo todo
I’m deeply grateful to everyone who has supported me during my academic journey—especially PUC Sociology Institute, Beltrán Undurraga, Sebastián Ureta, Javiera Reyes, and Eduardo Undurraga, who have taught me how to be a good social scientist
After months of waiting on PhD decisions, I’m thrilled to share that I’ve been accepted to the University of Oxford! Now begins the next stage: applying to Becas Chile and waiting to hear the results from my Clarendon nomination. If all goes well, I’ll be in Oxford this October🎓
Most definetly. While there are some general features underlying CR, many researchers interpret it differently and even have different views about substantive topics. For e.g., Elder-Vass and Archer's view (also an article) on culture. I am also more skeptic about CR and lean more towards pragmatism
Hi John, IMO it depends on what you want to get at. If you want a general and easy introduction to CR I think our book is the way to go. If you are thinking about specifics, say how mechanisms express in actual research practices, I think it is better to look at the specialized literature (not CR)
Struggling with CriticalRealism? Together with Tom Fryer, we wrote "Revisiting Realist Theory of Science: A Practical Guide". A book that breaks down Bhaskar’s RTS into clear, accessible insights for social science researchers.
📢 Get your copy now!
www.researchgate.net/publication/...
A must read for every social scientist, regardless of their subject
For those interested in science and technology studies, philosophy of science, or sociological theory, I hope this paper offers a new lens on how we can think about success, realism, and scientific practice. Check it out here: journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
By focusing on these chains of reference, we shift the debate towards a practice-based argument for realism, one that can bridge differences in epistemological commitments across disciplines and within sociological positions. (5/6)
Rather than getting stuck in ontological debates, I propose that realism should be first grounded in the everyday practices that scientists—both social and natural—use to generate success. It’s about how we construct knowledge and instruments, not just abstract theories! (4/6)
In my paper, I revisit Ian Hacking's interventionist argument with a Latourian twist, suggesting that a common thread runs across all sciences: the construction of "chains of reference." These practical epistemic activities link theories with real-world phenomena. (3/6)
Over the past few decades, debates on the scientific status of the social sciences have intensified. Mechanistic, perspectivist, and interpretivist approaches have each offered their own critiques and defenses of realism. But where does that leave us? (2/6)
🧵 Excited to share my new paper in SocTheory on how "chains of reference" help us rethink realism in the sciences! I argue that both social and natural sciences achieve epistemi success through shared practices, not just theories. Curious? Read on! (1/6)
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...