vocabulary of justification produced by an occupational group, rather than
being actual, functioning norms of science. My analysis builds on Mulkay’s,
but I also argue that the shared definition of reality makes certain things pos-
sible that otherwise would not be. For instance, belief in the fairness of the
process contributes to the recruitment of new entrants. Buying into the norm
of meritocracy is very costly to evaluators, because this belief leads them to
spend countless hours assessing the work of others. On “emotion work,” see
Hochschild (1979).
- Whitley (1984) and Bourdieu (1996).
- Whitley (1984).
- Bourdieu and de St. Martin (1975); also Bourdieu (1996, 30–53).
- His concept of habitus offers a rather thin analysis of subjectivity—see
Ortner (2005). The alternative, proposed by Boltanski, Thévenot, and their
associates, is to produce a sociology of critical judgment and other modes of
engagements. See Boltanski (2007a). On other modes of engagement, see
Thévenot (2007a). For a critique of Bourdieu’s approach to the self, see Alex-
ander (1995). For a critique of the zero-sum assumptions built into his con-
cept of field, see Lamont (1992). - Bourdieu (1988).
- On self-concept as a crucial but neglected dimension of the sociology
of knowledge, see especially Gross (2008). As argued by Gross, concerns with
self and self-concept are absent in the work of Bourdieu (1988) and Collins
(1998). For an earlier formulation, see Lamont (2001) and Szakolcai (1998).
The role of the self is explored in Chapter 4. - Heinich (1997); Thévenot (2006). See also Bénatouïl (1999).
- Dewey (1985). See also Ansell and Gash (2007). On the differences be-
tween my perspective and that of Bourdieu, see Lamont (2009). On the differ-
ences between my perspective and that of Boltanksi and Thévenot, see
Lamont (2008). - How Panels Work
- Knorr-Cetina (1999).
- Meyer and Rowan (1977).
- Elsewhere I take up differences [0]between the competitions under
consideration and other funding organizations, as well as their implica-
tions for customary rules of evaluation and other topics. For a comparison
266 / Notes to Pages 19–23