5. Enriching qualitative research by engaging peer interviewers: A case study / Devotta K., Woodhall-Melnik J., Pedersen Ch., Wendaferew A., Dowbor T., Guilcher S., Hamilton-Wright S., Ferentzy P., Hwang S. // Qualitative research. – 2016. – P. 1–20. – DOI: 10.1177/1468794115626244; Mode of access: http://qrj.sagepub. com/content/1/
6. Doede R. Technologies and species transitions: Polanyi, on a path to posthumanity? // Bulletin of science, technology & society. – 2011. – Vol. 31, N 3. – Р. 225–235. – DOI: 10.1177/0270467611406050; Mode of access: http://bst.sugepub.com/con-tent/31/3/225
7. Doyle E., Buckley P. Embracing qualitative research: A visual model for nuanced research ethics oversight // Qualitative research. – 2016. – P. 1–23. – DOI: 10.1177/ 1468794116661230; Mode of access: http://qrj.sagepub.com/content/1/
8. Gonzalez C., Meyer J. Integrating trends in decision-making research // Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making. – 2016. – Vol. 10, N 2. – P. 120–122. – DOI: 10.1177/1555343416655256; Mode of access: http://edm.sagepub.com/content/10/2/120/
9. Jacobs S.P. Snow’s «The two cultures»: Michael Polanyi’s response and context // Bulletin of science, technology & society. – 2011. – Vol. 31, N 3. – Р. 172–178. – DOI: 10.1177/0270467611406052; Mode of access: http://bst.sugepub.com/content/31/3/172
10. Keestra M. Understanding human action. Integrating meanings, mechanisms, causes, and contexts // Трансдисциплинарность в философии и науке: Подходы, проблемы, перспективы / Под ред. В. Бажанова, Р.В. Шольца. – М.: Издательский дом «Навигатор», 2015. – 564 с. – С. 201–235.
11. Kezar A., Maxey D. The Delphi technique: An untapped approach of participatory research // International journal of social research methodology. – 2016. – Vol. 19, N 2. – P. 143–160. – DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2014.936737; Mode of access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2104.936737
12. Mawer M. Observational practice in virtual worlds: Revisiting and expanding the methodological discussion // International journal of social research methodology. – 2016. – Vol. 19, N 2. – P. 161–176. – DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2014.936738; Mode of access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2104.936738
13. McNeese M. The phenomenal basis of human factors: Situating and distributing cognition within real-world activities // Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making. – 2016. – Vol. 10, N 2. – P. 116–119. – DOI: 10.1177/1555343416653703; Mode of access: http://edm.sagepub.com/content/10/2/116/
14. Nachane D. Methodology of the social sciences in the age of complexity: Unity, autonomy or integration? // Journal of interdisciplinary economics. – 2016. – Vol. 27, N 1. – P. 1–32. – DOI: 10.1177/0260107914560864; Mode of access: http://jie.sagepub.com/content/27/1/1/
15. Pelt van J. Toward a Polanyian critique of technology: Attending from the indwelling of tools to the Course of technological civilization // Bulletin of science, technology & society. – 2011. – Vol. 31, N 3. – Р. 236–246. DOI: 10.1177/0270467611406518; Mode of access: http://bst.sugepub.com/content/31/3/236
16. Pohl Ch. What is progress in transdisciplinary research // Трансдисциплинарность в философии и науке: Подходы, проблемы, перспективы / Под ред. В. Бажанова, Р.В. Шольца. – М.: Издательский дом «Навигатор», 2015. – 564 с. – С. 451–468.
17. Rip A. Folk theories of nanotechnologies // Science as culture. – L., 2006. – Vol. 15, N 4. – P. 349–365.
18. Roth W.-M. Cultural practices and cognition in debriefing // Journal of cognitive engineering and decision making. – 2015. – Vol. 9, N 3. – P. 263–278. – DOI: 10.1177/1555343415591395; Mode of access: http://edm.sagepub.com/content/9/3/263/