Answers to this questions are distributed across the science studies literature, and are usually partial. I cannot remember a concise integrative account, and there might be reasons for that. Ethnographic studies in (Northern) laboratories report instances of researchers turning to new problems. These studies emphasize chance and local circumstances (e.g. Knorr-Cetina 1981). Literature on the role of funding councils, national evaluation systems, and academy-industry collaboration all identify influences on problem choice. I would add path-dependency and previous research, which I found a strong factor in my own interviews with researchers.

Some of the influences are discussed in

Gläser, Jochen and Grit Laudel, 2016: Governing science: how science policy shapes research content. European Journal of Sociology 57(1), 117-168.

There is of course a strong bias twoards the global North in the literature. You might also want to look at Harsh et al. in Minerva 56 (1), 2018 on computer science in two East African cities.

Hello,

Are these of any help?:

Alon, U. (2009). How to choose a good scientific problem. Molecular cell, 35(6), 726-728.

http://www.weizmann.ac.il/mcb/UriAlon/sites/mcb.UriAlon/files/uploads/nurturing/howtochoosegoodproblem.pdf

This is the ResearchGate link, but not full text:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220037252

Harland, J., Pitt, S., & Saunders, V. (2005). Factors affecting student choice of the undergraduate research project: staff and student perceptions. Bioscience Education, 5(1), 1-19.

This is the full text:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3108/beej.2005.05000004

. . and this is the ResearchGate link, but not full text:

Article Factors affecting student choice of the undergraduate resear...

Very best wishes,

Mary

we explore literature in order to avoid reinventing the wheel again and to know what others have done, whether the phenomena holds true under diverse context, to know about methodological approaches they used and what possible approach is neglected...

Answers to this questions are distributed across the science studies literature, and are usually partial. I cannot remember a concise integrative account, and there might be reasons for that. Ethnographic studies in (Northern) laboratories report instances of researchers turning to new problems. These studies emphasize chance and local circumstances (e.g. Knorr-Cetina 1981). Literature on the role of funding councils, national evaluation systems, and academy-industry collaboration all identify influences on problem choice. I would add path-dependency and previous research, which I found a strong factor in my own interviews with researchers.

Some of the influences are discussed in

Gläser, Jochen and Grit Laudel, 2016: Governing science: how science policy shapes research content. European Journal of Sociology 57(1), 117-168.

There is of course a strong bias twoards the global North in the literature. You might also want to look at Harsh et al. in Minerva 56 (1), 2018 on computer science in two East African cities.

I may add this special number of the journal 'Revue d'anthropologie des connaissances'. It is very illustrative of a perspective from "science in 'non-hegemonic' countries", so I might be interesting for you to review it. It addresses some of the ideas that have been summarized above. Many of the works are written in French, though.

https://www.cairn.info/revue-anthropologie-des-connaissances-2008-3.htm

Nevertheless, this is a very illustrative piece for your interests included in that number and written in English is this one: https://www.cairn.info/revue-anthropologie-des-connaissances-2008-3-page-343.htm

You will find, as well, many book reviews that I believe point in interesting directions. Such as: SAUL DUBOW. A COMMONWEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE. SCIENCE, SENSIBILITY AND WHITE SOUTH AFRICA 1820-2000, OXFORD, OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2006, 296 P.

Hope this helps.

Hello,

I responded to this question 20 days ago, but realised that years ago, I had written a short article about, including other topics, why I carried out my PhD research:

Wilson, M. (2008). Snakes and ladders: reflections of a novice researcher. Nurse Researcher, 15(3) 7-14.

. . and the other article in the same journal, that also, so some extent, explains why I researched this subject:

Wilson, M. (2009). Asking sensitive questions: accessing the 'private' account. Nurse Researcher, 16(4) 31-39.

Our research was entitled 'Living with Faecal Incontinence' and I was working in this field as a specialist nurse.

I am not able to make these freely available on ResearchGate, but would be very happy to send you the final pdfs on request.

Very best wishes,

Mary

Thre are two major ways to study what you do:

you have an inner need to understand a certain problems (my class mates were haemophiliacs)

Your supervisor suggest a certain topic and has money for that kind of research

(aggression in mice)

A researcher is in general curious and may also be open-minded for many different things.

Dear colleague,

I suggest, por exemple, one book with experiences and some answers for one specific field (brazilian studies):

http://d3nv1jy4u7zmsc.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/PRIMEIRA-AULA-ING-ONLINE-single.pdf

Best regards!

The question can easily be read as if researchers indeed study what they study because of a simple reason, looking for a causal explanation. I am not sure of whether this reading captures the premise correctly.

However, if a causal story is to be told that would explain the researcher's activity then that story would have to engage with all kinds of social, technical, historical, political and natural contingencies. And not rarely, researchers do not know beforehand what they eventually will have studied. They cannot know the future.

Research that addresses this non-deterministic, contingent, unfolding comes, for instance, in the ethnographic genre, in feminist techno-science studies, in actor-network theory.