This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept

By Susan Leigh Star. 2010

2,185 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/69629af15206669258841d538190a725292cbccf

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Management Science and Operations Research

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Human-Data Interaction: The Human Face of the Data-Driven Society (2014, background): “Data, particularly personal data, can be seen as a boundary object (Star and Griesemer, 1989; Star, 2010), reﬂected in the many ways different communities refer to and think of data.”
The Sociomaterialty of Information Systems: Current Status, Future Directions (2014, background): “This iterative process follows relations and concurrently engages in real-time shadowing of heterogeneous entities performed by the relations, which unpredictably takes researchers to unexpected places and situations (see Bruni et al. 2007; Star 2010).”
Defining tipping points for social-ecological systems scholarship—an interdisciplinary literature review (2018, background): “Thispattern isnot unique in the history of science; examples include the use of terms ecosystem (Tansley 1935), boundary object (Leigh Star 2010) and resilience (Brand and Jax 2007, Baggio et al 2015).”
Conceptualizing smart service systems (2017, methodology): “With this framework, we integrate distinct strands of research, including the nature and properties of boundary objects (Star and Griesemer 1989; Star 2010; Carlile 2002), co-creation of value in service systems (Lovelock and Gummesson 2004; Vargo and Lusch 2008a; Maglio et al. 2006; Lusch and…”
Data Cards: Purposeful and Transparent Dataset Documentation for Responsible AI (2022, background): “Data Cards are designed to embody a high degree of interpretive flexibility [20].”
Value co-creation practices in business-to-business platform ecosystems (2019, methodology): “We show that the combination of the service-dominant (S-D) framework of Lusch and Nambisan (2015) with the dynamic process of boundary objects (Star and Griesemer 1989; Star 2010) provides a fruitful combination to describe and analyze value co-creation practices.”
Understanding the Role of Objects in Cross-Disciplinary Collaboration (2012, background): “and situations (Star 2010).”
The Concept of the Anthropocene (2017, background): “It can be seen as a “charismatic mega-category” (24) or “boundary object” (25) that stimulates interaction and debate across a range of disciplines and perspectives.”
Boundary Crossing and Boundary Objects (2011, neutral): “…not only interpretative flexibility that turns objects into boundary objects; boundary objects are organic arrangements that allow different groups to work together, based on a back-and-forth movement between ill-structured use in cross-site work and well-structured use in local work (Star, 2010).”
Decolonising Speech and Language Technology (2020, background): “In particular, we can understand speech and language technologies as “boundary objects” (Star and Griesemer, 1989; Star, 2010).”
ORES (2019, background): “We have found misclassification reports to be an effective boundary object [64] for communicating about the meaning a model captures and does not capture.”