IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v128y2015icp18-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundary objects in complementary and alternative medicine: Acupuncture vs. Christian Science

Author

Listed:
  • Owens, Kellie

Abstract

Nearly four in ten American use complementary or alternative medicine (CAM) each year. Even with a large number of patients, CAM practitioners face scrutiny from physicians and biomedical researchers who, in an era of evidence-based medicine, argue there is little evidence to support CAM treatments. Examining how CAM has or has not been integrated into American health care is crucial in understanding the contemporary boundaries of healthcare systems. An analytical tool from science and technology studies, boundary objects, can help scholars of medicine understand which practices become integrated into these systems. Using a comparative analysis based on archival and interview data, this paper examines the use of boundary objects in two alternative medical practices – acupuncture and Christian Science. While boundary objects alone cannot explain what health practices succeed or fail, juxtaposing the use of boundary objects by different CAM groups identifies the work boundary objects do to facilitate integration and the conditions under which they “work.” I find that acupuncturists' use of sterile needles as a boundary objects assists in their effective integration into U.S. healthcare because needles are both a symbol of biomedical prowess and a potentially unsafe device requiring regulation. Christian Scientists' use of the placebo effect as a boundary object has not succeeded because they fail to acknowledge the different contextual definitions of the placebo effect in biomedical communities. This comparative analysis highlights how context affects which boundary objects “work” for CAM practices and theorizes why alternative health practices succeed or fail to become integrated into healthcare systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Owens, Kellie, 2015. "Boundary objects in complementary and alternative medicine: Acupuncture vs. Christian Science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 18-24.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:128:y:2015:i:c:p:18-24
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.12.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614008284
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.12.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. O'Neill, Arthur, 1994. "Danger and safety in medicines," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 497-507, February.
    2. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    3. Baer, Hans A. & Jen, Cindy & Tanassi, Lucia M. & Tsia, Christopher & Wahbeh, Helen, 0. "The drive for professionalization in acupuncture: A preliminary view from the San Francisco Bay area," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 533-537, February.
    4. Kim, Jongyoung, 2006. "Beyond paradigm: Making transcultural connections in a scientific translation of acupuncture," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(12), pages 2960-2972, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fleming, Mark D. & Safaeinili, Nadia & Knox, Margae & Hernandez, Elizabeth & Brewster, Amanda L., 2023. "Between health care and social services: Boundary objects and cross-sector collaboration," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 320(C).
    2. Dowrick, Anna & Kelly, Moira & Feder, Gene, 2020. "Boundary spanners: Negotiating connections across primary care and domestic violence and abuse services," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 245(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    2. Michael Kaethler, 2019. "Curating creative communities of practice: the role of ambiguity," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Andersson, Ulf & Dasí, Àngels & Mudambi, Ram & Pedersen, Torben, 2016. "Technology, innovation and knowledge: The importance of ideas and international connectivity," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 153-162.
    4. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    5. Daniele T. P. Souza & Eugenia A. Kuhn & Arjen E. J. Wals & Pedro R. Jacobi, 2020. "Learning in, with, and through the Territory: Territory-Based Learning as a Catalyst for Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    6. Swan, Jacky & Goussevskaia, Anna & Newell, Sue & Robertson, Maxine & Bresnen, Mike & Obembe, Ademola, 2007. "Modes of organizing biomedical innovation in the UK and US and the role of integrative and relational capabilities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 529-547, May.
    7. Matthew Hawkins, 2018. "Researching and marketing to consumption collectives," Post-Print hal-01809954, HAL.
    8. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    9. Marco Tortoriello & Ray Reagans & Bill McEvily, 2012. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1024-1039, August.
    10. Maggie Chuoyan Dong & Yulin Fang & Detmar W. Straub, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Distance on the Joint Performance of Collaborating Firms: The Role of Adaptive Interorganizational Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 309-331, June.
    11. Kaifeng Duan & Changcheng Zhang & Junqiang Li & Rui Zhang & Yanwei Zhang, 2020. "Boundary-Spanning Search for Knowledge, Knowledge Reconstruction and the Sustainable Innovation Ability of Agricultural Enterprises: A Chinese Perspective," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    12. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    13. Paul David & Matthijs den Besten, "undated". "Mapping e-Science’s Path in the Collaboration Space: Ontological Approach to Monitoring Infrastructure Development," Discussion Papers 08-011, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    14. F. Ackermann & M. Yearworth & L. White, 2018. "Micro-processes in Group Decision and Negotiation: Practices and Routines for Supporting Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 709-713, October.
    15. Guha, Mahua & Das, Gopal, 2017. "Routine contraction in good times: An example of a typical prototype development routine," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 145-152.
    16. Richard J. Boland & Kalle Lyytinen & Youngjin Yoo, 2007. "Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 631-647, August.
    17. Stefan N. Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    18. Kreiner, Kristian & Jacobsen, Peter Holm & Jensen, Daniel Toft, 2011. "Dialogues and the problems of knowing: Reinventing the architectural competition," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 160-166, March.
    19. Kodama, Mitsuru & Hashimoto, Keisuke, 2024. "Research on high-end disruptive innovations - Analysis and insights from the video conferencing systems market," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    20. Paul R. Carlile & Eric S. Rebentisch, 2003. "Into the Black Box: The Knowledge Transformation Cycle," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1180-1195, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:128:y:2015:i:c:p:18-24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.