Sociology of technology

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following important information is missing from this article or section:
Development of the field
Help Wikipedia by researching and pasting it .

Technology sociology (also sociology of technology ) is a special sociology that deals with the social processes of the production and use of technology , the relationship between technology and society and the social consequences of technology.

Taking into account other areas, the subject is z. B. also established as the sociology of science and technology or the sociology of industry and technology . Sociology of technology is usually carried out as a sub-discipline of other departments at various universities in German-speaking countries . At the TU Berlin , the "Sociology of Technological Direction" course is offered, in which a large part of the credit points in the field of sociology of technology can be taken. A specialization in this field is also possible at the TU Dortmund .

Goals and perspectives of the sociology of technology

The sociology of technology focuses on the social effects of technology, be it in the form of technology assessment or in a more philosophical-anthropological way. In part, the sociology of technology tries to combine general sociology with engineering in an interdisciplinary manner. The subject area of ​​the sociology of technology can be large-scale technologies ( infrastructures ) as well as everyday use of household technology . In 1978, Siegfried Weischenberg complained about the distance between social science and society. Since then, the intensive occupation with computers and computer-mediated communication have given rise to new research focuses.

In socionics , sociologists and computer scientists collectively ask whether and how society can be simulated on the computer.

Feminist sociology of technology deals with the gender division of labor and male-dominated culture in the field of technology development, the underrepresentation of women in technical courses and professions, the gendering of technical artefacts and processes as well as the demarcation between nature / culture and body / machine; An understanding of technology and gender as co-constructed has prevailed .

Concept of technology

A basic distinction is made between technical technology - the term "technology" in the field of "material culture" ranges from the Stone Age hand ax and the grass tent to the mobile phone and high-rise buildings - and action technology or organizational technology ; technology here can range from Stone Age big game hunting to corporate organization . The “ magical techniques ” included by Arnold Gehlen , from rain dancing to crossing fingers before the lottery show on television, are mostly not dealt with or only marginally dealt with. The focus of the sociology of technology is still the examination of various technical technologies and their social design and embedding.

A basic assumption of the sociology of technology is the view of technology as a social process. In addition, technological sociological perspectives include assumptions, depending on the school, from the technological determination of the social to the purely social formation of technology. According to Werner Rammert, the term technology includes all artificial structures and processes that enable the simplification and permanent efficient control of a cause-effect relationship. The instrumental dimension is therefore indispensable for a sociological definition of technology.

Some further statements on the sociological view of technology are listed below as examples:

  • according to different theorists:
    • Technology is always a processual (figurative) social relationship (von Borries 1978 - cf. Norbert Elias ); Actors interact accordingly alongside technology, with the help of technology or in the form of technology; In the latter case, whoever drinks his cup of coffee is interacting with (a) the engineer (here: the inventor / designer of the cup), (b) the financier of your production (here: the porcelain factory entrepreneur) and (c) your employees Manufacturers (here: the workforce of the factory).
    • Technological development is no longer linear and phased, but embedded in a multidimensional context , that is, social and economic interests , political power potentials and cultural values ​​were incorporated into the results in very different ways at very different times; techniques can also be “lost”.
  • according to Werner Rammert in particular:
    • Technology is "no longer a substance (a thing, a thing) or a substance with certain properties, an artifact, but a form of reality with peculiar functions " Rammert 1999 ;
    • Technology is "no longer a general means, but as a specific tool for a purpose in a concrete context that is only realized in 'performance' " Rammert 1999 , that is: technology is negotiated by people in social action ;
    • Technology can no longer be traced back to individual inventors ; instead, many actors develop a certain technology-related rationality in relation to one another ;
    • Technology is "no longer to be seen as a passive object, but as a contributing 'agent'" Rammert 1999 , that means: technology interacts;

Objects of the sociology of technology

From a sociological perspective, technology is understood as the link between an artifact and a social form of action. This historically grown form of action takes shape in the material object. Users have the opportunity to adopt the form of action implied in the artifact and to change it. The example of the telephone illustrates that technical artifacts only become interesting from a sociological point of view when they are used: The focus is on the process of telephoning, in which the telephone is used for communication processes (instrumental dimension) or changes this through spatial distancing (medial Dimension).

The sociology of technology also deals with processes of the social construction of technology, in the example of the telephone system, for example, the implementation against competing systems (see Alexander G. Bell and the telephone ) or the later transformation of the system through innovative technologies such as the mobile phone (constructive dimension ). Social discourses about technology as well as questions of the political control and regulation of technology are also subjects of the sociology of technology (discursive dimension). Conceptual consideration is given to the various non-technical components in the idea of ​​the socio-technical system. The actual achievement of the technical designer does not lie in a single invention, but in the successful coupling of heterogeneous components, which ensures that the system works as smoothly as possible. According to Thomas P. Hughes (1979), Edison's most important merit is therefore not the invention of the incandescent lamp , but that of the entire system of electrical lighting, which also includes non-technical components.

Technology genesis

The idea of ​​the social construction of technology is based on the assumption that social actors have far-reaching influence on the decision between alternative socio-technical systems. A network of strategies and interests constitutes the “social logic” that significantly shapes the selection processes between technical developments. The fact that the internal combustion engine became the technical standard at the beginning of the 20th century can only be adequately explained by taking into account the underlying “social logic”.

Different models of technical evolution (path model according to Nelson / Winter and cycle model according to Tushman / Rosenkopf) indicate that phases of uncertainty and openness occur again and again, within which social negotiation processes point the way for further technological development. This is followed by phases of stability, changes here are at most incremental and move within the framework of the technological path that has been taken.

The main focus of technology genesis research is on the actor networks through which the innovation processes are initiated and supported. Here, technology genesis research deviates significantly from technology historiography, which focuses on the ingenious individual inventor. In addition to conventional sociological approaches that examine the interaction and coordination processes in innovation networks (Powell 1990), the actor network theory has established itself as a variant that also radically takes into account non-human beings (e.g. technical artifacts ) as a teammate and interaction partner.

Technology consequences, risk research

Another aspect of technology sociology is technology assessment. Based on the claim to anticipate and avoid unwanted consequences of new technology, social science technology research has developed new concepts for designing technology. These are based on an expert-supported analysis of alternative scenarios of technology development and the assessment of the possible social consequences of these scenarios. At the same time, concepts were able to prevail that take into account the level of knowledge of potential users when planning technology in order to prevent acceptance problems and risks. By focusing on the user and their needs, they also become a source of inspiration for new developments with a view to the later market success of a technical innovation (cf. Herstatt / Verworn 2003).

According to Ulrich Beck's remarks on the “risk society” (1986), society becomes a laboratory for scientific research in the post-industrial modern age. Knowledge is increasingly generated in societal application contexts. However, every new scientific finding also burdens society with new ignorance and the resulting scope for discretion, for example when deciding for or against prenatal diagnostics.

According to Charles Perrow (1987), the extent to which technical risks can be controlled depends crucially on the specific characteristics of the respective socio-technical system. Accordingly, tightly coupled systems with complex interactions are particularly difficult to control in the event of technical malfunctions. This is countered by the thesis of the "high reliability organization" by Gene Rochlin and others, which attests to the said organizations the ability to manage even high-risk systems efficiently and without accidents. The controversy has not yet been resolved; she nevertheless points out that organizational factors make an important contribution to the security of socio-technical systems.

Smart / autonomous technology

Technological and sociological research on “smart” technology is still in its infancy. With the introduction of technical assistance systems that make more and more decisions autonomously, such as the autopilot in aircraft, the relationship between people and technology is changing. Technology is “no longer a passive object”, but “a contributing 'agent'”. Instead of a purely instrumental relationship, there is interaction with technology, which advances to become a (partially) autonomous partner in hybrid systems. The new quality of context-sensitive technology, the decisions of which can be flexibly adapted to situations, leads to an increasing lack of transparency in technical processes for outside observers. In order to master such a system, new control mechanisms must be designed.

Technology policy, technology control

Since the 1940s, the state has had a decisive influence on the development of new large-scale technologies. The construction of the V-2 missile in Germany and the atomic bomb in the USA should be mentioned as pioneering projects. The government funding programs for nuclear and space technology of the 1950s represent the interventionist style of technology funding during the Cold War. After various failures in project funding, which concentrated on the financing of costly large-scale projects, there was a readjustment of state technology policy. The state now acts more as a moderator in independent innovation networks. In addition, countries and regions on the one hand, and the European Union on the other, are gaining ever greater influence in technology policy. In the course of this shift of competence, the question arises whether the state influence is suitable and sufficient for a targeted technology control.

Sociology of innovation

The sociology of innovation examines the genesis and diffusion of innovations from a social science perspective and observes both (technological) innovations and their sectoral application patterns, the adaptation strategies of the actors involved, the transformation processes in the individual social sub-areas, the (technology-induced) changes in cooperation and competitive relationships and Regulation patterns in economic sectors, the development of usage preferences in the respective markets as well as the interactions with legal-regulatory and socio-cultural framework conditions (cf. Werle 2003). For example, the extent to which hierarchical, market-based, network-like and communal forms of coordination have an impact on the innovativity of a society or individual companies and also influence whether external knowledge flows into innovations (Wittke / Heidenreich 2012) is examined. From a long-term and synthesizing perspective, it shows the questionable nature of the notion of linear technological development and the evolutionary entanglement of social and technical change. Current publications in the sociology of innovation deal with: B. with the phenomenon of prosumers (e.g. Hanekop / Wittke 2010) or the change in media sectors and structures due to the Internet (e.g. Dolata 2008, Schrape 2011, Dolata / Schrape 2013, Dolata / Schrape 2018) .

literature

Introductions

  • Nina Degele : Introduction to the sociology of technology. (= UTB for Science. 2288 Sociology ). Fink, Munich 2002, ISBN 3-7705-3448-4 .
  • Ulrich Dolata : Change through technology. A theory of socio-technical transformation. Campus, Frankfurt / New York 2011, ISBN 978-3-593-39500-5 .
  • Werner Rammert : Technology from a sociological perspective. West German publishing house, Opladen
  • Werner Rammert: Technology - Action - Knowledge. To a pragmatic technical and social theory. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2007, ISBN 978-3-531-15260-8 .
  • Andreas Schelske: Sociology of networked media. Basics of computer-mediated socialization. (= Series of interactive media textbooks ). Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich et al. 2007, ISBN 978-3-486-27396-0 .
  • Ingo Schulz-Schaeffer: Social theory of technology. (= Campus Research. 803). Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main et al. 2000, ISBN 3-593-36479-4 . (At the same time: Bielefeld, Univ., Diss.)
  • Johannes Weyer : Sociology of Technology. Genesis, design and control of socio-technical systems. (= Basic texts sociology ). Juventa, Weinheim et al. 2008, ISBN 978-3-7799-1485-3 .

literature

  • Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, Trevor J. Pinch (Eds.): The Social Construction of Technological Systems. New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. MIT Press, Cambridge MA et al. 1987, ISBN 0-262-02262-1 .
  • Volker von Borries: Technology as a social relationship. On the theory of industrial production. Kösel, Munich 1980, ISBN 3-466-32015-1 .
  • Ulrich Dolata : The Internet and the Transformation of the Music Industry. Reconstruction and explanation of uncontrolled sectoral change. In: Berlin Journal for Sociology. 18, 3, 2008, ISSN  0863-1808 , pp. 344-369, full text online (PDF; 574 kB) .
  • Ulrich Dolata, Jan-Felix Schrape : Internet, Mobile Devices and the Transformation of Media. Radical change as gradual reconfiguration. Edition Sigma, Berlin, ISBN 978-3-8360-3588-0 .
  • Ulrich Dolata, Jan-Felix Schrape: Collectivity and Power on the Internet. Social Movements - Open Source Communities - Internet Corporations. Springer VS, Wiesbaden 2018, ISBN 978-3-658-17909-0 .
  • Seabury Colum Gilfillan : The Sociology of Invention. An essay in the social causes of technic invention and some of its social results. Especially as demonstrated in the history of the ship. Follett Publishing Company, Chicago IL 1935.
  • Heidemarie Hanekop, Volker Wittke : Collaboration of the prosumers. The neglected dimension of the prosuming concept. In: Birgit Blättel-Mink, Kai-Uwe Hellmann (eds.): Prosumer Revisited. On the topicality of a debate. (= Consumer sociology and mass culture ). VS - Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2010, ISBN 978-3-531-16935-4 , pp. 96-113. Full text online (PDF, 930 kB) .
  • Cornelius Herstatt, Birgit Verworn (Hrsg.): Management of the early innovation phases. Basics, methods, new approaches. Gabler, Wiesbaden 2003, ISBN 3-409-12358-X .
  • Thomas P. Hughes : The Electrification of America. The System Builders. In: Technology and Culture. 20, 1979, ISSN  0040-165X , pp. 124-161.
  • Rodrigo Jokisch (ed.): Sociology of technology. (= Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 379). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1982, ISBN 3-518-27979-3 .
  • Hans Linde : Subject dominance in social structures. (= Society and science 4). Mohr, Tübingen 1972, ISBN 3-16-533891-4 .
  • Donald A. MacKenzie, Judy Wajcman (Eds.): The Social Shaping of Technology. How the Refrigerator got its hum. Open University Press, Milton Keynes et al. 1985, ISBN 0-335-15027-6 .
  • Richard R. Nelson, Sidney Winter: In search of useful theory of innovation. In: Research Policy. 6, 1977, ISSN  0048-7333 , pp. 36-76.
  • David F. Noble : Forces of Production. A Social History of Industrial Automation. Oxford University Press, New York NY et al. 1984, ISBN 0-19-504046-5 .
  • Werner Rammert, Ingo Schulz-Schaeffer (Eds.): Can machines act? Sociological contributions to the relationship between humans and technology. Campus-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2002, ISBN 3-593-37154-5 .
  • Jan-Felix Schrape: The change in the book trade through digitization and the Internet. Discussion Paper University of Stuttgart 2010 ( full text online ; PDF; 3.3 MB).
  • Michael L. Tushman, Lori Rosenkopf: Organizational Determinants of Technological Change. Toward a Sociology of Technological Evolution. In: Research in Organizational Behavior. 14, 1992, ISSN  0191-3085 , pp. 311-347.
  • Raymund Werle: Institutionalist technology analysis. Stand and prospects. (= MPIFG discussion paper. 03/8). MPIFG, Cologne 2003, full text online (PDF, 337 kB) .
  • Hans Dieter Hellige: From programmatic to empirical technology genesis research: a technology-historical analysis instrument for prospective technology evaluation . In: Technikgeschichte, 60th Vol. (1993), H. 3, pp. 186-223.
  • Wolfgang König : Technology, Power and Market: A Critique of the Social Science Technology Genesis Research . In: Technikgeschichte, 60th Vol. (1993), H. 3, pp. 243-266.

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Siegfried Weischenberg: The Electronic Editing - Journalistic Consequences of New Technology , Verlag Documentation Saur, Munich 1978, page 54
  2. ↑ To characterize the dimensions of technology: Johannes Weyer: Techniksoziologie. Genesis, design and control of socio-technical systems. Juventa, Weinheim & Munich 2008, p. 40ff.
  3. ↑ See Wiebe E. Bijker, Trevor Pinch: The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit of Each Other. In: Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, Trevor J. Pinch (Eds.): The Social Construction of Technological Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 1984, pp. 17-50.
  4. ↑ Cf. Bruno Latour: About technical mediation. Philosophy, sociology, genealogy. In: W. Rammert (Ed.): Technology and social theory. Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1998, pp. 29–81.
  5. ↑ Armin Grunwald: Technology assessment - an introduction . Edition Sigma, Berlin 2002.
  6. ^ Wolfgang Krohn, Johannes Weyer: Society as a laboratory. The creation of social risks through experimental research. In: social world. 40, 1989, pp. 349-373.
  7. ^ Todd LaPorte, Paula Consolini: Working in Practice But Not in Theory: Theoretical Challenges of 'High-Reliability Organizations'. In: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 1, 1991, pp. 19-47.
  8. ↑ cf. Johannes Weyer, Ingo Schulz-Schaeffer (Hrsg.): Management of complex systems. Concepts for coping with lack of transparency, uncertainty and chaos. Oldenbourg, Munich 2009.
  9. ↑ Werner Rammert: Technology. Keyword for an encyclopedia. In: Technical University Technology Studies Working Papers. Technical University of Berlin, Institute for Sociology, Department of Technology Sociology, Berlin 1999. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-8811
  10. ↑ cf. Werner Rammert, Ingo Schulz-Schaeffer (Eds.): Can machines act? Sociological contributions to the relationship between humans and technology. Campus, Frankfurt am Main 2002.
  11. ^ Johannes Weyer: Modes of Governance of Hybrid Systems. The Mid-Air Collision at Ueberlingen and the Impact of Smart Technology. In: Science, Technology & Innovation Studies. 2, 2006, ISSN  1861-3675 , pp. 127-149. online (PDF; 203 kB)
  12. ↑ cf. Georg Simonis: Differentiation of technology policy - from hierarchical to interactive state. In: Georg Simonis, Renate Martinsen (Ed.): Paradigm shift in technology policy. Leske + Budrich, Opladen 1995, pp. 381-404.
  13. ↑ cf. Edgar Grande: The Erosion of the State Control Potential in Research and Technology Policy. In: Werner Fricke (Ed.): Yearbook work and technology (main topic: future technologies and social responsibility). JHW Dietz, Bonn 1994, pp. 243-253.

See also

Web links