Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We welcome the opportunity offered by the editor of T&C to engage in this debate. As well as addressing specific questions raised by Nick Clayton we hope to move the discussion forward by focusing in particular upon the role of theoretical concepts in the history of technology. Clayton criticizes our account of the history of the bicycle and concludes that overall SCOT does not answer. We will readily concede that Clayton, as a specialist historian of the bicycle, is able to offer a more complete historical narrative drawing upon research not available to us eighteen years ago, but we will also argue that his conclusion about the (in)adequacy of SCOT does not hold and is based upon a misconception of the relationship between theory and empirical evidence in the history of technology (or indeed any other field).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bijker et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: