At Home with Someone Nonhuman

REFERENCES

• Akrich, M. 1992. “The De-Scription of Technical Objects.” In W. Bijker and J. Law (eds) Shaping Technology, Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, pp. 205–24. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Appadurai, A. (ed.) 1988. The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloor, D. 1976. Knowledge and Social Imaginary. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Buchli, V. 1999. An Archaeology of Socialism. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Burgess, J., T. Bedford, K. Hobson, G. Davies and C. M. Harrison. 2003. “(Un)Sustainable Consumption.” In F. Berkhout, M. Leach, and Scoones (eds) Global Environmental Change and Society. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Callon, M. 1986. “Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of Saint Brieuc Bay.” In J. Law (ed.) Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?, pp.196–233. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, A. 1998. “Window Shopping at Home: Classifieds, Catalogues and New Consumer Skills.” In D. Miller (ed.) Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, A. 2001. “The Aesthetics of Social Aspiration.” In D. Miller (ed.) Home Possessions: Material Culture behind Closed Doors, pp. 23–46. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Collins, H. 1983. “An Empirical Relativist Programme in the Sociology of Scientific Knowledge.” In K. Knorr-Cetina and M. Mulkay (eds) Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science, pp. 85–114. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cussins, C. 1998. “Ontological Choreography: Agency for Women Patients in an Infertility Clinic.” In M. Berg and A. Mol (eds) Differences in Medicine: Unravelling Practices, Techniques and Bodies, pp. 166–201. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dant, T. 1999. Material Culture in the Social World. Buckingham Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. and B. Isherwood. 1979. The World of Goods: Towards an Anthropology of Consumption. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gell, A. 1998. Art and Agency: An Anthropological Theory. Oxford: Caledonian Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hand, M., E. Shove and D. Southerton. 2003. “The Jet Set: Infrastructures, Bodies, Temporal Orders and the Practices of Showering.” Paper presented at the British Sociological Association Annual Conference, York University, April 11–13 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, M., S. Quilley and H. Beynon. 2002. Exploring the Tomato: Transformations of Nature, Society and Economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Hinchliffe, S. 1997. “Locating Risk: Energy Use, the ‘Ideal Home’ and the Non-ideal World.” Transactions of the Institute of British Geography 22(2): 197–209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hitchings, R. 2002. “People, Plants, and Performance: On Actor Network Theory and the Material Pleasures of the Private Garden.” Journal of Social and Cultural Geography 4(1): 99–114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iseda, J. 1998. “Scientific Rationality and the ‘Even Stronger Programme.’” Paper presented to the International Conference on Science and Technology Studies. Kyoto, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, P. 2000. “Rematerializing Social and Cultural Geography.” Journal of Social and Cultural Geography 1: 9–14.
   Google Scholar
• Knappett, C. 2002. “Photographs, Skeuomorphs and Marionettes: Some Thoughts on Mind, Agency and Object.” Journal of Material Culture 7(1): 97–117.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, K. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructed and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1988. The Pasteurisation of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1992. “One More Turn After the Social Turn: Easing Science Studies into the Non-modern World.” In E. McMullin (ed.) Social Dimensions of Science, pp. 272–92. Paris: Notre Dame.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1993. We Have Never Been Modern. New York: Harvester: Wheatsheaf.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1997. Aramis, ou l'Amour des Techniques. Paris: Éditions de la Découverte.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 2000. “When Things Strike Back: A Possible Contribution of ‘Science Studies’ to the Social Sciences.” British Journal of Sociology 51(1): 107–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laurier, E. and C. Philo. (1998). Meet You at Junction 17: A Socio-technical and Spatial Study of the Mobile Office. Glasgow: Department of Geography, University of Glasgow and Swindon: ESRC.
   Google Scholar
• Laurier, E. and C. Philo. 1999. “X-morphising: A Review Essay of Bruno Latour's ‘Aramis or the Love of Technology’.” Environment and Planning A 31: 1047–71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law, J. 1994. Organising Modernity. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Law, J. and V. Singleton. 2000. “This is Not an Object.” Centre for Science Studies, Lancaster University. http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/soc032jl.html.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, M. 1991. “Method: Measurement—Ordinary and Scientific Measurement as Ethnomethodological Phenomena.” In G. Button (ed.) Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, M. 1993. Scientific Practice and Ordinary Action: Ethnomethodology and Social Studies of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, D. 1995. “Consumption and commodities.” Annual Review of Anthropology 24: 141–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller, D. 1998a. A Theory of Shopping. Oxford: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, D. 1998. “Why Some Things Matter.” In D. Miller (ed.) Material Cultures: Why Some Things Matter, pp. 3–21. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press..
   Google Scholar
• Miller, D. 2001a. “Behind Closed Doors.” In D. Miller (ed.) Home Possessions: Material Culture and the Home, pp. 1–22. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, D. 2001b. “Possessions.” In D. Miller (ed.) Home Possessions: Material Culture and the Home, pp. 107–22. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Roe, E. 2003. “Things Become Food: Practices of Organic Food Consumers.” Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Bristol.
   Google Scholar
• Shapin, S and S. Shaffer. 1989. Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the Experimental Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E. 1999. “Notes on Comfort, Cleanliness and Convenience.” Paper presented at the ESF summer school on Consumption Everyday Life and Sustainability. www.lancs.acluk/users/scistud/esf/sve.html.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E. 2003. “Resources and Services: Consuming Energy in the Built Environment.” Paper presentation to Technonatures Symposium Department of Sociology, Goldsmiths College. June 26 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E. and D. Southerton. 2000. “Defrosting the Freezer—From Novelty to Convenience—A Narrative of Normalisation.” Journal of Material Culture 53: 301–19.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. 2000. “Human/Machine Reconsidered.” Department of Sociology, Lancaster University. http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/sociology/soc040ls.html.
   Google Scholar
• Tilley, C., S. Hamilton, S. Harrison and E. Anderson. 2000. “Nature, Culture, Clitter: Distinguishing between Cultural and Geomorphological Landscapes; The Case of Hilltop Tors in South-west England.” Journal of Material Culture 5(2): 197–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whatmore, S. 2002. Hybrid Geographies: Natures, Cultures, Spaces. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, R. 1973. The Country and the City. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woolgar, S. 1988. Science: The Very Idea. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zukin, S. 1991. Landscapes of Power: From Detroit to Disneyworld. Berkeley, OA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar