though knorr cetina et al do not quote b l it is likely that they are familiar with their work since they have sociological backgrounds further to this they might not have felt the need to since berger and luckman's ideas could be seen as another flowering of phenomenology with a sociological bent just like george herbert mead alfred schutz and harold garfinkel i think it was berger who edited a collection from the ' s called phenomenology an sociology in this vein sociology of science seems to have a sociological phenomenolgy as an axiom considering david bloor's strong programme which i'm sure at least one of knorr cetina et al will have cited robat