This paper examines the social and cognitive processes that unfold ove
r time as a technology develops. Our model focuses on the relationship
between the beliefs researchers hold about what is and is not technic
ally feasible, the technological artifacts they create, and the routin
es they use for evaluating how well their artifacts meet with their pr
ior expectations. The historical development of cochlear implants serv
es as an illustration of the model. The evidence suggests that there i
s a reciprocal interaction between beliefs, artifacts, and routines th
at gives rise to two cyclical processes. One is a process of inversion
at the micro level of individual cognition. wherein evaluation routin
es designed to judge specific artifacts begin reinforcing researchers'
beliefs. Once evaluation routines become the basis for constructing i
ndividual reality, technological claims are perceived as relevant only
to those who employ the same routines while appearing as noise to tho
se who employ different routines. The other is a process of institutio
nalization at the-macro level of shared cognition. By institutionaliza
tion we mean the development of a common set of evaluation routines th
at can be applied to all technological paths. Commonly accepted evalua
tion routines represent a shared reality that strongly shapes the dire
ction of future technological change. The micro- and macro-level proce
sses that shape individual and shared realities place paradoxical dema
nds on researchers in their efforts to develop a new technology. On th
e one hand, researchers must create and believe in their own realities
in order to make progress in their chosen paths and convince others.
On the other hand, researchers must also be ready to disbelieve their
realities and be willing to embrace the emerging shared reality even i
f it does not match theirs. How well this paradox is managed can profo
undly influence who emerges as the victor or the vanquished during the
genesis of a technology.