技术社会研究中的方法问题:调查人工制品和实践的传记

IF 1.9 4区 社会学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Science and Technology Studies Pub Date : 2019-09-14 DOI:10.23987/STS.65532
S. Hyysalo, N. Pollock, Robin Williams
{"title":"技术社会研究中的方法问题:调查人工制品和实践的传记","authors":"S. Hyysalo, N. Pollock, Robin Williams","doi":"10.23987/STS.65532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Science and Technology Studies understandings of technological change are at odds with its own dominant research designs and methodological guidelines. A key insight from the social shaping of technology research, for instance, has been that new technologies are formed in multiple interlinked settings, by many different groups of actors over long periods of time. Nonetheless, common research designs have not kept pace with these conceptual advances, continuing instead to resort to either intensive localised ethnographic engagements or extensive historical studies, both of which can generate only partial and limited accounts of the processes they suggest are at playThere has, however, been increasing interest in extending current methodological and analytical approaches through longitudinal and multi-site research templates, which include the emerging ‘biographies of artifacts and practices’ (BOAP) framework. Since its onset in the 1990s, there are now numerous exemplifications of the BOAP approach. This paper outlines its basic rationale and principles, and its significant variations, and discusses its contribution to STS understandings of innovation, especially user-led innovation. We finish by arguing that if STS is to continue to provide insight around innovation this will require a reconceptualisation of research design, to move from simple ‘snap shot’ studies to the linking together of ‘a string of investigations’.","PeriodicalId":45119,"journal":{"name":"Science and Technology Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"37","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Method Matters in the Social Study of Technology: Investigating the Biographies of Artifacts and Practices\",\"authors\":\"S. Hyysalo, N. Pollock, Robin Williams\",\"doi\":\"10.23987/STS.65532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Science and Technology Studies understandings of technological change are at odds with its own dominant research designs and methodological guidelines. A key insight from the social shaping of technology research, for instance, has been that new technologies are formed in multiple interlinked settings, by many different groups of actors over long periods of time. Nonetheless, common research designs have not kept pace with these conceptual advances, continuing instead to resort to either intensive localised ethnographic engagements or extensive historical studies, both of which can generate only partial and limited accounts of the processes they suggest are at playThere has, however, been increasing interest in extending current methodological and analytical approaches through longitudinal and multi-site research templates, which include the emerging ‘biographies of artifacts and practices’ (BOAP) framework. Since its onset in the 1990s, there are now numerous exemplifications of the BOAP approach. This paper outlines its basic rationale and principles, and its significant variations, and discusses its contribution to STS understandings of innovation, especially user-led innovation. We finish by arguing that if STS is to continue to provide insight around innovation this will require a reconceptualisation of research design, to move from simple ‘snap shot’ studies to the linking together of ‘a string of investigations’.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45119,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Science and Technology Studies\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"37\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Science and Technology Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23987/STS.65532\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science and Technology Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23987/STS.65532","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 37

摘要

科学与技术研究对技术变革的理解与它自己主导的研究设计和方法指南不一致。例如,从技术研究的社会塑造中得出的一个关键见解是,新技术是在多个相互关联的环境中,由许多不同的参与者群体在很长一段时间内形成的。尽管如此,普通的研究设计并没有跟上这些概念上的进步,而是继续诉诸于密集的局部人种学参与或广泛的历史研究,这两种方法都只能对他们认为正在发挥作用的过程产生部分和有限的解释。然而,人们对通过纵向和多地点研究模板扩展当前的方法和分析方法越来越感兴趣。其中包括新兴的“工件和实践传记”(BOAP)框架。自上世纪90年代出现以来,BOAP方法的例子不胜枚举。本文概述了它的基本原理和原则,以及它的显著变化,并讨论了它对STS对创新的理解的贡献,特别是用户主导的创新。最后,我们认为,如果STS要继续提供有关创新的见解,就需要对研究设计进行重新概念化,从简单的“快照”研究转向将“一系列调查”联系在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Method Matters in the Social Study of Technology: Investigating the Biographies of Artifacts and Practices
Science and Technology Studies understandings of technological change are at odds with its own dominant research designs and methodological guidelines. A key insight from the social shaping of technology research, for instance, has been that new technologies are formed in multiple interlinked settings, by many different groups of actors over long periods of time. Nonetheless, common research designs have not kept pace with these conceptual advances, continuing instead to resort to either intensive localised ethnographic engagements or extensive historical studies, both of which can generate only partial and limited accounts of the processes they suggest are at playThere has, however, been increasing interest in extending current methodological and analytical approaches through longitudinal and multi-site research templates, which include the emerging ‘biographies of artifacts and practices’ (BOAP) framework. Since its onset in the 1990s, there are now numerous exemplifications of the BOAP approach. This paper outlines its basic rationale and principles, and its significant variations, and discusses its contribution to STS understandings of innovation, especially user-led innovation. We finish by arguing that if STS is to continue to provide insight around innovation this will require a reconceptualisation of research design, to move from simple ‘snap shot’ studies to the linking together of ‘a string of investigations’.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Science and Technology Studies
Science and Technology Studies HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
23
审稿时长
53 weeks
期刊最新文献
Facilitating the Movement of Knowledge in Occupational Health Services Elliott Anthony (2023) Algorithmic Intimacy. The Digital Revolution in Personal Relationships West Darrel M and Allen John R (2020) Turning Point: Policymaking in the Era of Artificial Intelligence “Should We Stay or Should We Go now?” Knox Hannah (2020) Thinking Like a Climate: Governing a City in Times of Environmental Change
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1