The social construction of technology

E SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF TECHNOLOGY

In 1987s there were several school of thoughts which came with different theories. In fact when we talk about technology in advance, there is an important thing that should not be forgotten in human mind. This is technology must be controlled but not controlling people.  Generally social construction of technology is a theory within the field of science and technology studies. 

Some sociologists of science argue that the very entities of physics, such as the particles studied in particle physics, are the products of intergroup negotiations over the interpretation of observations (Pinch 1996). SCOT scholars, in turn, apply the concept of interpretive flexibility to technological artifacts to showhowartifacts are similarly the product of intergroup negotiations. Examples of this kind of scholarship include MacKenzie’s (1990) account of the negotiations over the definition of missile accuracy, Pinch and Bijker’s (1987; Bijker 1995) work on early bicycles, Bijker’s (1987, 1995) studies of Bakelite and fluorescent lighting, Elzen’s (1986) work on ultracentrifuges, and Misa’s (1992) investigation of the manufacture of steel.5 Technological artifacts are sufficiently underdetermined to allow for multiple possible designs, so whatever the design that finally results from the process, it could have been different.

Although scholarship in the social construction of technology (SCOT) has contributed much to illuminating technological development, most work using this theoretical approach is committed to an agency-centered approach. SCOT scholars have made only limited contributions to illustrating the influence of social structures. In this article, the authors argue for the importance of structural concepts to understanding technological development. They summarize the SCOT conceptual framework defined by Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker and survey some of the methodological and explanatory difficulties that arise with their approach. Then the authors present concepts from organizational sociology and political economy that illuminate structural influences in shaping phenomena of interest to SCOT scholars. These structural concepts can be applied to the study of the design, development, and transformation of technology. The authors conclude that the limited amount of scholarship on structural factors in the social shaping of technological development presents numerous opportunities for research.

There are several social construction components which are basically make the construction to be there. The following are briefly explained components of this social construction technology;

Interpretative flexibility

Interpretative of technology in life depends on the flexibility and it is caused by the less power of thinking and interpretation technology makes people to be wrong. It depends on how much people interpret the gift on the digital age. 

Closure and Stabilization.

A multi group design process can experience controversies when different interpretations lead to conflicting images of an artifact. Design continues until such conflicts are resolved and the artifact no longer poses a problem to any relevant social group.

Social relevance 

What I know, why I know, how I know, and to whom I know is it relevance?

Technology is going to be better for social use if people know what technology is all about and its importance to the society.

By Msele Musa

BAPRM 42626