Abstract
In this paper, I outline several methodological questions that we need to confront. The chief question is how can we identify the nature of technological change and its varied cultural consequences—including social, political, institutional, and economic dimensions—when our different research methods, using distinct ‘levels’ or ‘scales’ of analysis, yield contradictory results. What can we say, in other words, when our findings about technology follow from the framings of our inquiries? In slightly different terms, can we combine insights from the fine-grained “social shaping of technology” as well as from complementary approaches accenting the “technological shaping of society?” As a way forward, I will suggest conducting multi-scale inquiries into the processes of technological and cultural change. This will involve recognizing and conceptualizing the analytical scales or levels on which we conduct inquiry (very roughly, micro, meso, macro) as well as outlining strategies for moving within and between these scales or levels. Of course we want and need diverse methodologies for analyzing technology and culture. I find myself in sympathy with geographer Brenner (New state spaces: urban governance and the rescaling of statehood, 2004, p. 7), who aspires to a “theoretically precise yet also historically specific conceptualization of [technological change] as a key dimension of social, political and economic life.”
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Achterhuis H. (2001) American philosophy of technology: The empirical turn. Indiana University Press, Bloomington
Beniger J.R. (1989) The control revolution: Technological and economic origins of the information society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Bijker, W., Law, J. (eds) (1992) Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change. MIT Press, Cambridge/London
Bijker, W., Pinch, T., Hughes, T. (eds) (1987) The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. MIT Press, Cambridge
Blaszczyk R. (2000) Imagining consumers: Design and innovation from Wedgwood to Corning. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Borg K. (1999) The ‘Chauffeur problem’ in the early auto era: Structuration theory and the users of technology. Technology and Culture 40: 797–832
Brenner N. (2004) New state spaces: Urban governance and the rescaling of statehood. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Brey P. (2003) Theorizing modernity and technology. In: Misa T. et al (eds) Modernity and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 33–71
Chandler A.D. Jr. (1972) Anthracite coal and the beginnings of the industrial revolution in the United States. Business History Review 46: 141–181. doi:10.2307/3113503
Chandler A.D. Jr. (1977) The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. Belknap Press, Cambridge
Chandler A.D. Jr. (1988) Markets, hierarchies, and hegemony: Comment. In: McCraw T.K. (eds) The essential Alfred Chandler: Essays toward a historical theory of big business. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, pp 432–460
Decker, M., Ladikas, M. (eds) (2004) Bridges between science, society and policy: Technology assessment—methods and impacts. Springer, Berlin
Edgerton D. (2007) The shock of the old: Technology and global history since 1900. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Edwards P.N. (2003) Infrastructure and modernity: Force, time, and social organization in the history of sociotechnical systems. In: Misa T. et al (eds) Modernity and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 185–225
Feenberg A. (2003) Modernity theory and technology studies: Reflections on bridging the gap. In: Misa T. et al (eds) Modernity and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 73–104
Fischer C.S. (1992) America calling: A social history of the telephone to 1940. University of California Press, Berkeley
Headrick D.R. (2000) When information came of age: Technologies of knowledge in the age of reason and revolution, 1700–1850. Oxford University Press, New York
Hecht G. (2002) Rupture-talk in the nuclear age: Conjugating colonial power in Africa. Social Studies of Science 32: 691–727
Hobsbawm E.J. (1968) Industry and empire. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London
Ihde D. (2004) Has the philosophy of technology arrived? A state-of-the-art review. Philosophy of Science 71: 117–131. doi:10.1086/381417
Joerges B. (1999) Do politics have artefacts?. Social Studies of Science 29(3): 411–431. doi:10.1177/030631299029003004
John R.R. (1997) Elaborations, revisions, dissents: Alfred D. Chandler, Jr.’s The Visible Hand after twenty years. Business History Review 71: 151–200. doi:10.2307/3116156
Klein H., Kleinman D. (2002) The social construction of technology: Structural considerations. Science, Technology & Human Values 27: 28–52
Kline R.R. (2000) Consumers in the country: Technology and social change in rural America. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Kline R., Pinch T. (1996) Users as agents of technological change: The social construction of the automobile in the rural United States. Technology and Culture, 37
Kranakis E. (2005) Surveying technology and history: Essential tensions and postmodern possibilities. Technology and Culture 4: 805–812. doi:10.1353/tech.2006.0022
Misa T.J. (1988) How machines make history, and how historians (and others) help them to do so. Science, Technology & Human Values 13: 308–331
Misa T.J. (1994) Retrieving sociotechnical change from technological determinism. In: Smith M.R., Marx L. (eds) Does technology drive history?. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 115–141
Misa T.J. (2004a) Leonardo to the Internet: Technology and culture from the renaissance to the present. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Misa, T. J. (2004b). Beyond linear models: Science, technology, and processes of change. In K. Grandin, et al. (Eds.), The science–industry nexus: History, policy, implications (pp. 257–276). Science History/Watson Publishing.
Mol A. (2002) The body multiple: Ontology in medical practice. Duke University Press, Durham
Nye D. (2006) Technology matters: Questions to live with. MIT Press, Cambridge
Oudshoorn, N., Pinch, T. (eds) (2003) How users matter: The co-construction of users and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge
Rip, A., Misa, T., Schot, J. (eds) (1995) Managing technology in society: The approach of constructive technology assessment. Pinter, London
Schot J. (2003) The contested rise of a modernist technology politics. In: Misa T. et al (eds) Modernity and technology. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 257–278
Scranton P. (1997) Endless novelty: Specialty production and American industrialization, 1865–1925. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Smith, M.R., Marx, L. (eds) (1994) Does technology drive history?. MIT Press, Cambridge
Staudenmaier J.M. (1990) Recent trends in the history of technology. The American Historical Review 95: 715–725. doi:10.2307/2164278
Usselman S.W. (2006) Still visible: Alfred D. Chandler’s The Visible Hand. Technology and Culture 47(3): 584–596. doi:10.1353/tech.2006.0206
Verbeek P.-P. (2005) What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. Pennsylvania State University Press, State College
Vig, N.J., Paschen, H. (eds) (2000) Parliaments and technology: The development of technology assessment in Europe. State University of New York Press, Albany
Winner L. (1977) Autonomous technology: Technics-out-of-control as a theme in political thought. MIT Press, Cambridge
Winner L. (1980) Do artifacts have politics?. Daedalus 109(1): 121–136
Winpenny T.R. (1979) Hard data on hard coal: Reflections on Chandler’s anthracite thesis. Business History Review 53: 247–255
Winpenny T.R. (1984) Industrial progress and human welfare: The rise of the factory system in nineteenth century Lancaster. University Press of America, Lanham, MD
Woolgar S., Cooper G. (1999) Do artefacts have ambivalence? Moses’ bridges, Winner’s bridges and other urban legends in S &TS. Social Studies of Science 29(3): 433–449. doi:10.1177/030631299029003005
Yates J. (2006) How business enterprises use technology: Extending the demand-side turn. Enterprise and Society 7(3): 422–455. doi:10.1093/es/khl004
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Misa, T.J. Findings follow framings: navigating the empirical turn. Synthese 168, 357–375 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9447-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9447-y