The article "Responsible Innovation Scholarship: Normative, Empirical, Theoretical, and Engaged" by Erik Fisher et al. provides an overview of the development and diversity of responsible innovation scholarship over the past decade. The *Journal of Responsible Innovation* (JRI), launched in 2014, has become a platform for a rich and diverse body of scholarship that addresses the normative governance, practice, and assessment of knowledge-based innovation. The authors identify four distinct scholarly styles within JRI: Articulation, Interpretation, Assessment, and Intervention. 1. **Articulation**: This style focuses on theoretical inquiry, including philosophical, sociological, and institutional analyses. It involves the development of frameworks, concepts, and models to understand and advance responsible innovation. Key themes include normative foundations, politics and governance, ethics and values, and reflexive heuristics. 2. **Interpretation**: This style involves empirical observation and analysis of specific contexts, cases, and phenomena. It examines actors, institutions, discourses, norms, practices, and various other objects of study. Key themes include local and global settings, institutions and organizations, practices and performances, and views and discourses. 3. **Assessment**: This style focuses on normative appraisal, evaluation, and critique. It includes future-oriented appraisals, evaluations of substantive, procedural, and discursive outcomes, and scholarly standpoints and opinions. Key themes are ethics and futures appraisal, outcomes evaluation, and scholarly assessment. 4. **Intervention**: This style involves efforts to influence responsible innovation in specific sites and settings through public and stakeholder engagement, governance from within, and collaborative and deliberative interactions. It often combines elements of the other styles and aims to promote democratic values and societal considerations. The article highlights the rich and evolving nature of responsible innovation scholarship, emphasizing its interdisciplinary and engaged approach. It also underscores the importance of pluralistic spaces for inquiry and interaction, fostering rigorous investigation and vigorous debate.The article "Responsible Innovation Scholarship: Normative, Empirical, Theoretical, and Engaged" by Erik Fisher et al. provides an overview of the development and diversity of responsible innovation scholarship over the past decade. The *Journal of Responsible Innovation* (JRI), launched in 2014, has become a platform for a rich and diverse body of scholarship that addresses the normative governance, practice, and assessment of knowledge-based innovation. The authors identify four distinct scholarly styles within JRI: Articulation, Interpretation, Assessment, and Intervention. 1. **Articulation**: This style focuses on theoretical inquiry, including philosophical, sociological, and institutional analyses. It involves the development of frameworks, concepts, and models to understand and advance responsible innovation. Key themes include normative foundations, politics and governance, ethics and values, and reflexive heuristics. 2. **Interpretation**: This style involves empirical observation and analysis of specific contexts, cases, and phenomena. It examines actors, institutions, discourses, norms, practices, and various other objects of study. Key themes include local and global settings, institutions and organizations, practices and performances, and views and discourses. 3. **Assessment**: This style focuses on normative appraisal, evaluation, and critique. It includes future-oriented appraisals, evaluations of substantive, procedural, and discursive outcomes, and scholarly standpoints and opinions. Key themes are ethics and futures appraisal, outcomes evaluation, and scholarly assessment. 4. **Intervention**: This style involves efforts to influence responsible innovation in specific sites and settings through public and stakeholder engagement, governance from within, and collaborative and deliberative interactions. It often combines elements of the other styles and aims to promote democratic values and societal considerations. The article highlights the rich and evolving nature of responsible innovation scholarship, emphasizing its interdisciplinary and engaged approach. It also underscores the importance of pluralistic spaces for inquiry and interaction, fostering rigorous investigation and vigorous debate.