The mutual constitution of sensuous and discursive understanding in scientific practice: An autoethnographic lens on academic writing

Abstract

The research process and production of scientific knowledge has traditionally been understood to be based on abstract analysis and intellectual capacity rather than physical and emotional resources, promoting an understanding of academic practice as a detached, non-emotional and objective activity. Lately, several researchers have bemoaned this lack of recognition of the bodiliness of our work. In this study, we attempt to address this gap by exploring and conceptualizing some of the ways in which the embodied dimensions of academic research practices are intertwined with the articulation of ideas in the writing of scientific texts. In order to pursue our aim, we draw on experiences explicated through an autoethnographic approach, including the generation of personal narratives and in-depth conversations with 18 researchers from different universities in Europe and the US. The article contributes to the sociology of science and academic literacy literature, by conceptualizing the interconnectedness between sensuous and discursive understandings in this context. With the advancement of this theoretical approach, we illuminate how scientific practice is bound up with emotional, embodied, material, social, political and institutional forces. We also challenge the dichotomy between ‘knowledge work’ or theoretical tasks on the one hand, and ‘body work’ or physical labor on the other.

Cite this

Anna Essén, Sara Winterstorm Värlander (2012). The mutual constitution of sensuous and discursive understanding in scientific practice: An autoethnographic lens on academic writing. Management Learning. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507611431529

@article{anna2012the,
  title  = {The mutual constitution of sensuous and discursive understanding in scientific practice: An autoethnographic lens on academic writing},
  author = {Essén, Anna and Värlander, Sara Winterstorm},
  year   = {2012},
  journal = {Management Learning},
  doi    = {10.1177/1350507611431529}
}

Citations in this library

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 60 citations exist upstream.

References

Cited by