The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Assemblage thinking and actor‐network theory: conjunctions, disjunctions, cross‐fertilisations
Open accessAbstract
This paper shows that assemblage thinking and actor‐network theory (ANT) have much more to gain from each other than debate has so far conceded. Exploring the conjunctions and disjunctions between the two approaches, it proposes three cross‐fertilisations that have implications for understanding three key processes in our socio‐material world: stabilisation, change and affect. First, the conceptual vocabulary of ANT can enrich assemblage thinking with an explicitly spatial account of the ways in which assemblages are drawn together, reach across space and are stabilised. Second, each approach is better attuned to conceptualising a particular kind of change in socio‐material relations: ANT describes change without rupture, or fluidity, whereas assemblage thinking describes change with rupture, or events. Third and last, assemblage thinking could fashion ANT with a greater sensitivity for the productive role of affect in bringing socio‐material relations into being through the production of desire/wish (désir). We demonstrate the implications of these cross‐fertilisations for empirical work through a case study of the global market for assisted reproduction.
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
Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory
Latour, B. (2005) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001 · Cited by 16,778
Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society
Bijker, W. E., & Latour, B. (1988) · Technology and Culture · doi:10.2307/3105094 · Cited by 10,767
Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning
Barad, K. (2006) · doi:10.2307/j.ctv12101zq · Cited by 10,472
(1987) · Cited by 8,955
Callon, M. (1984) · The Sociological Review · doi:10.1111/j.1467-954x.1984.tb00113.x · Cited by 7,763
(2007) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 7,214
Vibrant Matter: A Political Ecology of Things
Bennett, J. (2010) · Duke University Press eBooks · doi:10.1215/9780822391623 · Cited by 6,923
Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of Nature.
Green, P. A., & Haraway, D. J. (1992) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2076334 · Cited by 5,455
Parables for the Virtual: Movement, Affect, Sensation
Massumi, B. (2002) · doi:10.1215/9780822383574 · Cited by 4,627
The Ethnography of Infrastructure
STAR, S. L. (1999) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/00027649921955326 · Cited by 4,486
Cited by
Public food procurement from family farming: A food system and social network perspective
Gaitán-Cremaschi, D., Klerkx, L., Aguilar-Gallegos, N., Duncan, J., Pizzolón, A., Dogliotti, S., & Rossing, W. A. H. (2022) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102325 · Cited by 50
Metadata
- Authors
- Müller, M., & Schurr, C.
- Venue
- Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-03-15
- Volume
- 41
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 217-229
- ISSN
- 0020-2754 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-5661
- OpenAlex
- W2301786850
- Cited by
- 409
- References
- 77
- FWCI
- 381.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Assemblage thinking and actor‐network theory: conjunctions, disjunctions, cross‐fertilisations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/tran.12117
- The paper
- Müller, M., & Schurr, C. (2016). Assemblage thinking and actor‐network theory: conjunctions, disjunctions, cross‐fertilisations. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12117
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.