Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Nanotechnology and HFE: critically engaging human capital in small-scale robotics research

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this article is to extend the Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE) engagements with nanotechnology (specifically, small-scale robotics) in university settings, in terms of a broader view of human capital. Nanotechnology as a novel technology presents challenges for HFE not only in terms of design and optimization but also in terms of the human aspects involved in the nanotechnology settings. Therefore, it is important to comprehend the knowledge production and work practices in nanotechnology settings. Correspondingly, this article presents two interrelated contributions. First, it presents one of the foremost studies conducted at the intersection of HFE and small-scale robotics. Second, it addresses a broader notion of human capital in nanotechnology settings in terms of knowledge and practices. Toward this end, this article presents an ethnographic case study of small-scale (micro- and nano-) robotics using the viewpoint of Symbolic Interactionism. This article characterizes three main facets of nanotechnology: nanotechnology as mode 2 knowledge; nanotechnology and university research; nanotechnology and innovation panarchy. Using these aspects as the overarching basis, the domain of nanorobotics is situated in university settings to capture a broader notion of human capital and work practices. The study revealed that the participants were constructing not only robots but also its ecology. The robot was best comprehended not as a technical artifact but as a sociotechnical endeavor. Thus, this research presents nanotechnology as a broader construct that goes beyond the limitations of size and scale and bridges the gap between teamwork, technical creations and the overarching ecology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.uwnrg.org.

  2. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

  3. This manner of characterization of research has been widely discussed and actively debated in research policy circles. Further, many other alternatives have been proposed to Mode 2 context, regarding research policy and nature of knowledge, such as Pasteur’s quadrant, the Triple Helix and strategic research, among others see (Hessels and Van Lente 2008 for a review and discussion). These alternatives have approached Mode 2 research from the perspective of research policy and often argue about subtle aspects relating to relations between knowledge production, research policy and society. Not withstanding these alternatives, nanotechnology as mode 2 presents a new way of comprehending the nanotechnology convergence with existing technologies.

  4. It must be noted that the engagement between nanotechnology and universities lies at the intersection of various disciplines ranging from science and technology studies, design studies, innovation studies, to mention a few (e.g., Aurigemma et al. 2013; Barben et al. 2007; Fisher 2007). Currently, these fields have addressed various aspects and related paraphernalia of nanotechnology in university settings. HFE professionals can use insights from these fields to develop knowledge-based tools to help nanotechnology researchers and support their creative processes to enable a proactive approach to nanotechnology research. For example, Kant and Burns (2016) emphasized the necessity for engaging “laboratory studies” from the field of science and technology studies, in order to supplement the HFE comprehension of nanotechnology laboratories. Similarly, in this current article, the ethnography is discussed in light of these various fields. Further, this paper also draws upon the field of innovation studies to lay the groundwork for considering the university nanotechnology relationships in terms of the innovation ecosystem in which the universities are situated. It must be mentioned that these fields do differ from HFE in their scope and content. In contrast to their selective viewpoints and differing views, HFE takes a holistic and systemic view of human technology interaction design as well as integration.

References

  • Abreu M, Demirel P, Grinevich V, Karataş-Özkan M (2016) Entrepreneurial practices in research-intensive and teaching-led universities. Small Bus Econ 47(3):695–717. doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9754-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Airbus (2016) The airbus Shopfloor Challenge at ICRA 2016. Retrieved October 1, 2016, from http://www.airbusgroup.com/int/en/people-careers/Working-for-Airbus-Group/Airbus-Shopfloor-Challenge-2016.html

  • AlbertaTechFutures (2015) AlbertaTechFutures. Retrieved April 22, 2015, from http://www.albertatechfuturesca/nanoalbertaaspx

  • Allen CR, Angeler DG, Garmestani AS, Gunderson LH, Holling CS (2014) Panarchy: theory and application. Ecosystems 17(4):578–589. doi:10.1007/s10021-013-9744-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aurigemma J, Chandrasekharan S, Nersessian NJ, Newstetter W (2013) Turning experiments into objects: the cognitive processes involved in the design of a lab-on-a-chip device. J Eng Educ 102(1):117–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barben D, Fisher E, Selin C, Guston DH (2007) Anticipatory governance of nanotechnology: foresight, engagement, and integration. In: The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 979–1000

  • Bhat JSA (2005) Concerns of new technology based industries—the case of nanotechnology. Technovation 25(5):457–462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumer H (1998) Symbolic Interactionism: perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California. Retrieved from Original published in 1969

  • BMO Capital Markets (2008) Canada’s Technology Triangle. Toronto: Bank of Montreal. Retrieved from https://uwaterloo.ca/research-technology-park/sites/ca.research-technology-park/files/uploads/files/BMO%20Waterloo-Guelph%20Economic%20Outlook%20Report.pdf

  • Bovy M, Vinck D (2009) Social complexity and the role of the object: installing household waste containers. In: Vinck D (ed) Everyday engineering: an ethnography of design and innovation. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 53–76

    Google Scholar 

  • Bramwell A, Nelles J, Wolfe DA (2008) Knowledge, innovation and institutions: global and local dimensions of the ICT cluster in Waterloo, Canada. Reg Stud 42(1):101–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bramwell A, Hepbrun N, Wolfe D (2012) Growing innovation ecosystems: university-industry knowledge transfer and regional economic development in Canada. Knowledge Synthesis Paper on Leveraging Investments in HERD, Final Report to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, May, 15

  • Bucciarelli LL (1988) An ethnographic perspective on engineering design. Des Stud 9(3):159–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bucciarelli LL (1994) Designing engineers. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucciarelli LL (2002) Between thought and object in engineering design. Des Stud 23(3):219–231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cacciabue PC, Carsten O, Vanderhaegen F (2014) Is there still a need for CTW? Cogn Technol Work 16(3):311–317. doi:10.1007/s10111-014-0286-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CFI (2016) CFI strategic roadmap 2012–2017. Retrieved from http://www.innovation.ca/en/AboutUs/Publicationsandreports/CFIStrategicRoadmap201217

  • Chang Y-C, Yang PY, Martin BR, Chi H-R, Tsai-Lin T-F (2016) Entrepreneurial universities and research ambidexterity: a multilevel analysis. Technovation 54:7–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chowdhury A, Sanjog J, Reddy SM, Karmakar S (2012) Nanomaterials in the field of design ergonomics: present status. Ergonomics 55(12):1453–1462

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CITC (2011) Nanotechnology subsector study. Retrieved from http://www.ictc-ctic.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/ICTC_NanoTechExecSummary_EN_06-11.pdf

  • Comission E (2011) High-level expert group on key enabling technologies final report. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/ict/files/kets/hlg_report_final_en.pdf

  • Comission E (2012) A European strategy for key enabling technologies—a bridge to growth and jobs. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52012DC0341:EN:NOT

  • DCG (2014) nProber II. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from http://dcgsystems.com/products/nanoprobing/nprober-ii/

  • Doutriaux J (2003) University-industry linkages and the development of knowledge clusters in Canada. Local Economy 18(1):63–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ensign PC, Farlow S (2016) Serial entrepreneurs in the Waterloo ecosystem. J Innov Entrep 5(1):911. doi:10.1186/s13731-016-0051-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz H (1998) The norms of entrepreneurial science: cognitive effects of the new university–industry linkages. Res Policy 27(8):823–833. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(98)00093-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz H (2003) Research groups as “quasi-firms”: the invention of the entrepreneurial university. Res Policy 32(1):109–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz H, Leydesdorff L (2000) The dynamics of innovation: from National Systems and “Mode 2” to a Triple Helix of University–industry–government relations. Res Policy 29(2):109–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira A, Mavroidis C (2006) Virtual reality and haptics for nanorobotics. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 13(3):78–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher E (2007) Ethnographic invention: probing the capacity of laboratory decisions. NanoEthics 1(2):155–165. doi:10.1007/s11569-007-0016-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flach JM (2011) Complexity: learning to muddle through. Cogn Technol Work 14(3):187–197. doi:10.1007/s10111-011-0201-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuda T, Nogawa K, Kojima M, Nakajima M, Homma M (2013) Local environmental control technique for bacterial flagellar motor. In: Mavroidis C, Ferreira A (eds) Nanorobotics: current approaches and techniques. Springer, New York, pp 411–423. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2119-1_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Genaidy A, Karwowski W (2006) Nanotechnology occupational and environmental health and safety: education and research needs for an emerging interdisciplinary field of study. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf Serv Ind 16(3):247–253. doi:10.1002/hfm.20051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerbin A, Drnovsek M (2015) Determinants and public policy implications of academic-industry knowledge transfer in life sciences: a review and a conceptual framework. J Technol Trans 41(5):979–1076. doi:10.1007/s10961-015-9457-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghafele R (2012) Financing University Research. MPRA paper. University Library of Munich, Germany. Retrieved from http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/36394/

  • Gibbons M (2000) Mode 2 society and the emergence of context-sensitive science. Sci Public Policy 27(3):159–163

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons M, Limoges C, Nowotny H, Schwartzman S, Scott P, Trow M (1994) The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Greaves-Holmes WL (2009) A guide for the safe handling of engineered and fabricated nanomaterials. J Technol Stud 35(1). doi:10.21061/jots.v35i1.a.5

  • Greaves-Holmes WL (2012) A retrospective analysis and field study of nanotechnology-related ergonomic risk in industries utilizing nanomaterials. University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida. Retrieved from http://etd.fcla.edu/CF/CFE0004497/Greaves-Holmes_Wanda_L_201205_PhD.pdf

  • Guerrero M, Urbano D, Fayolle A, Klofsten M, Mian S (2016) Entrepreneurial universities: emerging models in the new social and economic landscape. Small Bus Econ 47(3):551–563. doi:10.1007/s11187-016-9755-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson LH, Holling CS (2002) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Hessels LK, Van Lente H (2008) Re-thinking new knowledge production: a literature review and a research agenda. Res Policy 37(4):740–760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling CS (1996) Engineering resilience versus ecological resilience. In: Schulze P (ed) Engineering within ecological constraints, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp 31–44. https://www.nap.edu/read/4919/chapter/4#32

  • Holling CS (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 4(5):390–405

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (2011) Coping with complexity: past, present and future. Cogn Technol Work 14(3):199–205. doi:10.1007/s10111-011-0202-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E, Cacciabue PC (1999) Cognition, technology & work: an introduction. Cogn Technol Work 1(1):1–6. doi:10.1007/s101110050006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes A (2006) University Industry Linkages and UK Science and Innovation Policy (No. wp326). ESRC Centre for Business Research-Working Papers. ESRC Centre for Business Research

  • Hughes A, Kitson M (2012) Pathways to impact and the strategic role of universities: new evidence on the breadth and depth of university knowledge exchange in the UK and the factors constraining its development. Camb J Econ 36(3):723–750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins E (1995) Cognition in the wild. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • IEA (2017) Definition and domains of ergonomics. Retrieved February 21, 2017, from http://www.iea.cc/whats/

  • Initiative. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/PCAST/pcast_fifth_nni_review_oct2014_final.pdf

  • Ivan IA, Hwang G, Agnus J, Chaillet N, Régnier S (2013) Nist and ieee challenge for magpier: the fastest mobile microrobots in the world. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 20(2):63–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalili N (2013) Nanomechanical cantilever-based manipulation for sensing and imaging. In: Mavroidis C, Ferreira A (eds) Nanorobotics: current approaches and techniques. Springer, New York, pp 29–40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones PH (2005) Information practices and cognitive artifacts in scientific research. Cogn Technol Work 7(2):88–100. doi:10.1007/s10111-005-0178-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanj M (2013) Reservoir nanoagents for in situ sensing and intervention. In: Mavroidis C, Ferreira A (eds) Nanorobotics: current approaches and techniques. Springer, New York, pp. 51–67. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2119-1_4

  • Kant V (2016) Revisiting the technologies of the old: a case study of cognitive work analysis and nanomaterials. Cogn Technol Work. doi:10.1007/s10111-016-0397-8

    Google Scholar 

  • Kant V, Burns CM (2016) Engaging nanotechnology: ethnography of lab-on-a-chip technology in small-scale fluidics research. Cogn Technol Work 18(1):33–52. doi:10.1007/s10111-015-0344-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karwowski W (2006) From past to future: building a collective vision for HFES 2020. HFES Bull 49(11):1–3

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G, Ross KG, Moon BM, Klein DE, Hoffman RR, Hollnagel E (2003) Macrocognition. IEEE Intell Syst 18(3):81–85. doi:10.1109/MIS.2003.1200735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lavie D, Drori I (2012) Collaborating for knowledge creation and application: the case of nanotechnology research programs. Organ Sci 23(3):704–724. doi:10.1287/orsc.1110.0656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenaghan SC, Wang Y, Xi N, Fukuda T, Tarn T, Hamel WR, Zhang M (2013) Grand challenges in bioengineered nanorobotics for cancer therapy. IEEE Trans Bio-Med Eng 60(3):667–673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lester R (2005) Universities, innovation, and the competitiveness of local economies: a summary report from the local innovation systems project: Phase I. (No. 05-010). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/lis/papers/LIS05-010.pdf

  • Lester RK, Sotarauta M (Eds) (2007) Innovation, universities, and the competitiveness of regions. Tekes. Retrieved from http://www.tekes.fi/julkaisut/universities.pdf

  • Lintern G (2010) Work-focused analysis and design. Cogn Technol Work 14(1):71–81. doi:10.1007/s10111-010-0167-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mangematin V, Walsh S (2012) The future of nanotechnologies. Technovation 32(3–4):157–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavroidis C, Ferreira A (2013) Nanorobotics: past, present, and future. In: Mavroidis C, Ferreira A (eds) Nanorobotics: current approaches and techniques. Springer, New York, pp 3–27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin K (2007) Out of the shadow of orthodoxy: Waterloo@50. University of Waterloo, Waterloo

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyazaki K, Islam N (2007) Nanotechnology systems of innovation—an analysis of industry and academia research activities. Technovation 27(11):661–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon B (2002) Naturalistic decision making: establishing a naturalistic perspective in judgment and decision-making research (pp. 1–25). Presented at the 19th qualitative analysis conference May 23-25, 2002, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Retrieved from http://perigeantechnologies.com/publications/NaturalisticDecisionMaking_EstablishingaNaturalisticPerspectiveinJudgmentandDecisionMakingResearch.pdf

  • Munro A, Bathelt H (2014) Innovation linkages in new and old economy sectors in Cambridge-Guelph-Kitchener-Waterloo (Ontario). In Wolfe DA (ed) Innovating in urban economies: economic transformation in Canadian city-regions. Toronto, pp 219–244

  • nanoAlberta (2007) Alberta nanotechnology strategy. Retrieved from http://www.albertatechfutures.ca/Portals/0/Business%20and%20Industry%20Support/nanotechnology_strategy_complete2.pdf

  • National Research Council (2012) Research universities and the future of America: ten breakthrough actions vital to our nation’s prosperity and security. The National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelles J, Bramwell A, Wolfe DA (2005) History, culture and path dependency: origins of the Waterloo ICT cluster. In: Wolfe DA, Lucas M (eds) McGill-Queen’s University Press, Montreal and Kingston, pp 227–252

  • NIOSH (2013a) Protecting the nanotechnology workforce: NIOSH Nanotechnology Research and Guidance Strategic Plan, 2013–2016. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication 2014–106. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2014-106/pdfs/2014-106.pdf

  • NIOSH (2013b, January 1) Nanotechnology at NIOSH. Retrieved September 20, 2016, from http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/nanotech/nanotechnology-research-center.html

  • NNCI (2016) National nanotechnology coordinated infrastructure. Retrieved October 1, 2016, from http://www.nnci.net/about-nnci/

  • Nowotny H, Scott P, Gibbons M (2003) Introduction: ‘Mode 2’ revisited: the new production of knowledge. Minerva 41(3):179–194. doi:10.1023/A:1025505528250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowotny H, Scott PB, Gibbons MT (2013) Re-thinking science: knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Wiley, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • PCAST Nano (2014) Report to the President and Congress on the Fifth Assessment of the National Nanotechnology

  • Prus RC (1997) Subcultural mosaics and intersubjective realities an ethnographic research agenda for pragmatizing the social sciences. State University of New York Press, Albany

    Google Scholar 

  • Rampersad G, Quester P, Troshani I (2010) Managing innovation networks: Exploratory evidence from ICT, biotechnology and nanotechnology networks. Corporate Image and Reputation in B2B Markets, 39(5):793–805

  • Rasmussen E, Moen Ø, Gulbrandsen M (2006) Initiatives to promote commercialization of university knowledge. Technovation 26(4):518–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (2013) The new world of discovery, invention, and innovation: convergence of knowledge, technology, and society. J Nanopart Res 15(9):1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roco MC, Bainbridge WS, Tonn B, Whitesides G (eds) (2013) Convergence of knowledge, technology and society. World Technology Evaluation Center. Retrieved from http://www.wtec.org/NBIC2/Docs/FinalReport/Pdf-secured/NBIC2-FinalReport-WTECversion–web.pdf

  • Rusk N, Resnick M, Berg R, Pezalla-Granlund M (2008) New pathways into robotics: strategies for broadening participation. J Sci Educ Technol 17(1):59–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sequeira R, Genaidy A, Shell R, Karwowski W, Weckman G, Salem S (2006) The nano enterprise: a survey of health and safety concerns, considerations, and proposed improvement strategies to reduce potential adverse effects. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf Serv Ind 16(4):343–368. doi:10.1002/hfm.20057

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman LA (2007) Human-machine reconfigurations: plans and situated actions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Szewczyk P (2014) Technical, ecological, and social aspects of nanotechnologies. In: Marek T, Karwowski W, Frankowicz M, Kantola J, Zgaga P (eds) Human factors of a global society: a system of systems perspective. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 107–114

    Google Scholar 

  • Thursby J, Thursby M (2011) University-industry linkages in nanotechnology and biotechnology: evidence on collaborative patterns for new methods of inventing. J Technol Transf 36(6):605–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trosow S, McNally MB, Briggs LE, Hoffman C, Ball CD, Jacobs A, Moran B (2012) Technology transfer and innovation policy at Canadian universities: Opportunities and social costs (No. 23). FIMS Library and Information Science Publications. Retrieved from http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1025&context=fimspub

  • Upton C, Doherty G, Gleeson F, Sheridan C (2008) Designing decision support in an evolving sociotechnical enterprise. Cogn Technol Work 12(1):13–30. doi:10.1007/s10111-008-0124-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vartholomeos P, Fruchard M, Ferreira A, Mavroidis C (2011) MRI-guided nanorobotic systems for therapeutic and diagnostic applications. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 13:157–184. doi:10.1146/annurev-bioeng-071910-124724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veugelers R, Del Rey E (2014) European expert network on economics of education (EENEE): the contribution of universities to innovation, (regional) growth and employment (No. EENEE Analytical Report 18). Retrieved from http://www.cesifo-group.de/portal/page/portal/EENEEContent/_IMPORT_TELECENTRUM/DOCS/EENEE_AR18.pdf

  • Vyas D (2012) Ethnographic notes on visualization practices in tissue engineering research. Cogn Technol Work 15(4):373–388. doi:10.1007/s10111-012-0238-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weir NA, Sierra DP, Jones JF (2005) A review of research in the field of nanorobotics (No. SAND2005-6808). Sandia report. Sandia National Laboratories. Retrieved from http://prod.sandia.gov/techlib/access-control.cgi/2005/056808.pdf

  • Williams R (1983) Keywords: a vocabulary of culture and society. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • WREDC (2016) Waterloo Region Economic Development Corporation. Retrieved September 20, 2016, from http://www.wredc.ca/

  • Yang QZ, Miao CY (2010) Integrating human factors into nanotech sustainability assessment and communication. Presented at the 5th IEEE conference on industrial electronics and applications (ICIEA), pp 1–5

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article is dedicated to UWNRG.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Vivek Kant

    Present address: , D-44, The Woods, Wakad, Pune, 411057, Maharashtra, India

Authors and Affiliations

    Authors
    1. Vivek Kant
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Vivek Kant.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Kant, V. Nanotechnology and HFE: critically engaging human capital in small-scale robotics research. Cogn Tech Work 19, 419–444 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-017-0414-6

    Download citation

    • Received:

    • Accepted:

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-017-0414-6

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation