The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Oncomouse That Roared: Hybrid Exchange Strategies as a Source of Distinction at the Boundary of Overlapping Institutions
Abstract
Conventional wisdom suggests that when institutional logics overlap, the production of hybrids signifies collapse, blending, or easy coexistence. The author provides an alternative interpretation: hybrids can maintain a distinctive boundary and can emerge from contestation, not coexistence. This alternative interpretation is grounded in an analysis of a critical moment at the academic‐commercial boundary: the enforcement of patents to a key technology on academic geneticists. In their reaction to commercial encroachment, skilled actors (scientists) took the resources of the commercial logic and transformed their meaning to establish hybrid strategies that preserved the distinctive institutions. Thus, hybrids must be reconsidered as emerging from conflict and produced through boundary work to maintain the distinction and resilience of logics.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology
Powell, W. W., Koput, K. W., & Smith-Doerr, L. (1996) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393988 · Cited by 8,499
Gieryn, T. F. (1983) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095325 · Cited by 4,838
Toward a new economics of science
Partha, D., & David, P. A. (1994) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(94)01002-1 · Cited by 2,448
The Social Meaning of Money: "Special Monies"
Zelizer, V. A. (1989) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/229272 · Cited by 809
Boundary Organizations: Enabling Collaboration among Unexpected Allies
O'Mahony, S., & Bechky, B. A. (2008) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.53.3.422 · Cited by 626
Caveat Emptor: The Construction of Nonprofit Consumer Watchdog Organizations
Rao, H. (1998) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/231293 · Cited by 562
The Private Science of Louis Pasteur
Geison, G. L. (1996) · doi:10.1515/9781400864089 · Cited by 284
Cited by
Advancing Research on Hybrid Organizing – Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises
Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014) · The Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.893615 · Cited by 2,107
Multiple Institutional Logics in Organizations: Explaining Their Varied Nature and Implications
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. (2014) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2011.0431 · Cited by 1,571
Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation
Lamont, M. (2012) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-120022 · Cited by 1,492
Navigating Institutional Plurality: Organizational Governance in Hybrid Organizations
Mair, J., Mayer, J., & Lutz, E. (2015) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840615580007 · Cited by 522
Villani, E., Rasmussen, E., & Grimaldi, R. (2017) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2016.06.004 · Cited by 365
Metadata
- Authors
- Murray, F.
- Venue
- American Journal of Sociology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2010-09
- Volume
- 116
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 341-388
- ISSN
- 0002-9602 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5390
- OpenAlex
- W2025382157
- Cited by
- 401
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 35.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Oncomouse That Roared: Hybrid Exchange Strategies as a Source of Distinction at the Boundary of Overlapping Institutions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/653599
- The paper
- Murray, F. (2010). The Oncomouse That Roared: Hybrid Exchange Strategies as a Source of Distinction at the Boundary of Overlapping Institutions. American Journal of Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1086/653599
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
