Analysis by: Anne Brady
-This article was a summary of his first four chapters,
-In this chapter he basically talks about the ways in which technology is a social process.
-He introduces the terms "interpretative flexibility" and "relevant social groups". You can not explain technology solely by an artifacts' intrinsic properties, but rather by also including the meanings attributed to an artifact by relevant social groups. This is the process of interpretative flexibility--how an artifact is interpreted, or what meanings are given to it. Interpretative flexibility decreases when the meanings attributed to an artifact become less ambiguous and more stable. The interpretation of a relevant social group finally becomes dominant, and closure occurs.-- society has come to a consensus on the meaning of an artifact (see bicycle case as an example).
-Technology is a process of social construction, as it occurs in steps while continuously changing between the steps, either becoming more or less stabilized.
-Non-technical factors are important in understanding and analyzing the development of technology. Here he introduces the term "sociotechnology". Technology is socially constructed and society is technically constructed. The construction of society and the construction of science and technology should be explained in the same way, not as one causing or being a by-product of another. So now artifacts are "sociotechnical ensembles". They are socially as well as technically constructed.
- Different processes of sociotechnical change occur. In general,
1. When there is no dominant relevant social group then there are no vested interests and there are many different innovations that can be made. In this case all social groups are important, so the success of an innovation often depends on "problem redefinition"--redefining a problem in order to please groups that do not find the "real" problem important.
2. There is one dominant group that is able to insist upon its definitions as being the appropriate ones. When this situation occurs, innovations tend to be conventional.
3. There are two or more groups, each having arguments that carry little weight in some situations and more weight in others. The closure process in this case becomes a battle between relevant social groups, and nobody wins.
-**He refers to "technological frames", but I do not know what he is talking about. I think this is something he talked about thoroughly in Chapter 3.
-Bijker believes that we should develop a new field of study called "sociotechnology".
-Technology is embedded in modern culture as well as culture is embedded in technology.
-Seems against the deterministic way of thinking--A constructivist analysis is instead necessary for sociotechnology. We must not take a deterministic approach to technology, but instead realize that because of interpretative flexibility, choice and change are possible. If the public feels that they have no control over technology, then they will turn their backs on it and then it will slip out of control. What constitutes technology as working is socially constructed (based on choices), therefore, we cannot "blame the hardware".
-The fixing of meanings that occur during a technological frame is a form of power in that meanings become hardened or fixed. Previous meanings given to an artifact limit the flexibility of other new meanings. Relevant social groups have invested so much in defining an artifact that its meaning can not easily be changed. In this sense, an artifact may have power in determining social development. (But we must remember that social processes also determined the artifact).
Artifacts in this sense are also called "exemplary artifacts".
-Artifacts can also be boundary objects. Inclusion is used as an example to state the boundaries of inside and outside. For example, willing participants in the florescent light business were required by G.E. to accept the high-intensity florescent lamp as the only daylight florescent lamp in the game. Those who complied with this were let inside of the frame and those who did not were left outside. To put it another way, those who complied were of the relevant social group whose meanings became dominant. The meanings of those who did not comply, were, for lack of a better term, ignored. So those outside were "forced" to take the artifact as it was, without being able to modify it.
-sociotechnical ensembles that constitute a semiotic power structure can become softened by deconstructing their obduracy. For example, the bicycle was at first part of a structure that prevented women from using it. This structure was deconstructed, however, when new ensembles such as low-wheeled bicycles and bloomers allowed for women to use them, and to become a part of its structure. Perhaps a better word than deconstructed would be reconstructed. In any case, the meanings which were once fixed to the bicycle which disallowed women from using them were softened or replaced by new meanings which allowed women to use them.
The basic point Bijker seems to be saying is that technology is socially constructed, and he is trying to show the different ways in which this is so by using the examples above.