IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/abw/journl/y2026id1287.html

Scientific Communities in High-Tech Product Promotion: A Conceptual Model of Cultural and Institutional Moderators

Author

Listed:
  • S. V. Nazaryan

  • D. S. Andreyuk

Abstract

High-tech products are promoted under heightened uncertainty and information asymmetry: prior to purchase or implementation, audiences often lack the hands-on experience needed to independently assess the claimed effects. Expert interpretation, trust building, and the market legitimation of innovations are therefore critical to high-tech marketing. This article conceptualizes scientific communities as epistemic networks that produce and validate knowledge, establish standards of evidence, and disseminate expert assessments through professional communication channels. Based on a synthesis of the literature on innovation and high-tech marketing, technology acceptance and diffusion, the sociology of science, and institutional theory, the article proposes a conceptual model of how scientific communities influence high-tech product promotion. The model identifies three mechanisms: the translation of expert knowledge and the resulting reduction in information asymmetry, trust building through scientific authority, and product legitimation within professional and market fields. The article also highlights a research gap: high-tech marketing, research on epistemic communities, and institutional theory have largely developed in isolation, and the connections among them remain underexplored. Scientific communities are therefore viewed not as a passive resource but as independent actors in their own right in process of recognition, with their own logic of interpretive and reputational competition. The proposed model links the three mechanisms to the cultural and institutional conditions that determine their effectiveness and helps explain variations in marketing outcomes across different settings. The strength of these mechanisms depends on cultural norms concerning technology interpretation and trust, as well as on institutional rules of recognition, incentive systems, and infrastructures supporting interaction between science and business. The model may provide a basis for further empirical testing and for operationalizing the role of scientific communities in high-tech product promotion.

Suggested Citation

  • S. V. Nazaryan & D. S. Andreyuk, 2026. "Scientific Communities in High-Tech Product Promotion: A Conceptual Model of Cultural and Institutional Moderators," Strategic decisions and risk management, Real Economy Publishing House, vol. 17(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:abw:journl:y:2026:id:1287
    DOI: 10.17747/2618-947X-2026-2-230-238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/article/viewFile/1287/1241
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/article/viewFile/1287/1248
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17747/2618-947X-2026-2-230-238?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    2. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Engineering Uncontestedness? The Origins and Institutional Development of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-64, October.
    3. Sauve, Raphael & Watts, Jamie, 2003. "An analysis of IPGRI's influence on the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 307-327, November.
    4. Bradley Allsop & Jacqueline Briggs & Ben Kisby, 2018. "Market Values and Youth Political Engagement in the UK: Towards an Agenda for Exploring the Psychological Impacts of Neo-Liberalism," Societies, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-20, September.
    5. Andrew B. Whitford & Derrick Anderson, 2021. "Governance landscapes for emerging technologies: The case of cryptocurrencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1053-1070, October.
    6. Richard Higgott & J J Woo & Tim Legrand, 2021. "The demand for IPEand public policy in the governance of global policy design [The emerging regional architecture of world politics]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 40(4), pages 449-466.
    7. Bernard Hoekman, 2014. "The Bali Trade Facilitation Agreement and Rulemaking in the WTO: Milestone, Mistake or Mirage?," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/102, European University Institute.
    8. Himick, Darlene & Brivot, Marion, 2018. "Carriers of ideas in accounting standard-setting and financialization: The role of epistemic communities," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 29-44.
    9. Barry Eichengreen and Fabio Ghironi., 1997. "European Monetary Unification and International Monetary Cooperation," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C97-091, University of California at Berkeley.
    10. Moshe Maor, 2017. "Policy entrepreneurs in policy valuation processes: The case of the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(8), pages 1401-1417, December.
    11. Gary Gereffi, 2019. "Global value chains and international development policy: Bringing firms, networks and policy-engaged scholarship back in," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 2(3), pages 195-210, September.
    12. Roland Königsgruber, 2010. "A political economy of accounting standard setting," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 14(4), pages 277-295, November.
    13. Nelson, Douglas R., 2015. "Prospects for Constitutionalization of the WTO," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 135-153, January.
    14. Jeanie Bukowski, 2017. "A “new water culture†on the Iberian Peninsula? Evaluating epistemic community impact on water resources management policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 239-264, March.
    15. Hirschmann, Gisela, 2012. "Organizational learning in United Nations’ peacekeeping exit strategies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 47(3), pages 368-385.
    16. Benjamin Cashore & Jette Steen Knudsen & Jeremy Moon & Hamish van der Ven, 2021. "Private authority and public policy interactions in global context: Governance spheres for problem solving," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1166-1182, October.
    17. Katharina Rietig, 2014. "‘Neutral’ experts? How input of scientific expertise matters in international environmental negotiations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(2), pages 141-160, June.
    18. Cornwall, Andrea & Shankland, Alex, 2008. "Engaging citizens: Lessons from building Brazil's national health system," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(10), pages 2173-2184, May.
    19. M. Long & A. Iles, 1997. "Assessing Climate Change: Co-evolution of Knowledge, Communities, and Methodologies," Working Papers ir97036, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
    20. Lisa Kastner, 2013. "Transnational Civil Society and the Consumer-friendly Turn in Financial Regulation," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-01070524, HAL.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:abw:journl:y:2026:id:1287. 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: ООО Ð˜Ð·Ð´Ð°Ñ‚ÐµÐ»ÑŒÑ ÐºÐ¸Ð¹ дом Â«Ð ÐµÐ°Ð»ÑŒÐ½Ð°Ñ Ñ ÐºÐ¾Ð½Ð¾Ð¼Ð¸ÐºÐ°Â» (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.jsdrm.ru/jour/about/journalSponsorship .

    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.