Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Digital Methods× | Controversy Mapping× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Science Technology Studies | Science Technology Studies |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 2013 | 2010 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Richard Rogers, Amsterdam Digital Methods Initiative | Bruno Latour (Sciences Po médialab); codified by Tommaso Venturini |
| Tyyppi≠ | Empirical research approach for online data | Qualitative descriptive method and pedagogy |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Rogers, R. (2013). Digital Methods. MIT Press. ISBN: 9780262018838 | Venturini, T. (2010). Diving in magma: how to explore controversies with actor-network theory. Public Understanding of Science, 19(3), 258-273. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | Follow the medium, Natively digital research, Web epistemology methods | Cartography of controversies, Mapping scientific controversies, Controversy analysis |
| Liittyvät | 4 | 4 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Digital methods is an empirical research approach, developed by Richard Rogers and the Amsterdam Digital Methods Initiative, that takes the methods of online platforms and devices—the link, the like, the hashtag, the search engine ranking—and repurposes them for social and cultural research. Its guiding maxim is to 'follow the medium': rather than importing offline methods like the survey onto the web, the analyst learns what the medium already counts, ranks, and recommends, and turns those native operations into research instruments. | Controversy mapping is a descriptive method for exploring and representing socio-technical disputes while they are still open and unsettled, before they harden into accepted facts or stable technologies. Developed as a teaching practice by Bruno Latour and codified by Tommaso Venturini at the Sciences Po médialab, it asks the analyst to dive into the heat of a debate, follow the actors and their arguments without prematurely taking sides, and render the resulting complexity legible through maps and visualisations. It treats controversy not as a pathology to be resolved but as the privileged moment in which the social and the technical are visibly being assembled. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|