Bandingkan kaedah
Semak kaedah pilihan anda secara bersebelahan; baris yang berbeza akan diserlahkan.
| Domestication of Technology Analysis× | Social Construction of Technology× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang | Science Technology Studies | Science Technology Studies |
| Keluarga | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Tahun asal≠ | 1992 | 1984 |
| Pengasas≠ | Roger Silverstone, Eric Hirsch, David Morley | Trevor Pinch & Wiebe Bijker |
| Jenis≠ | Qualitative analytic framework in media and technology studies | Constructivist theory of technological development |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Silverstone, R., & Hirsch, E. (Eds.). (1992). Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces. Routledge. ISBN: 9780415067003 | Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399-441. DOI ↗ |
| Alias | Domestication theory, Domestication approach, Taming of technology analysis | SCOT, Social constructivism of technology, Interpretive flexibility analysis |
| Berkaitan | 4 | 4 |
| Ringkasan≠ | Domestication of technology analysis studies how people 'tame' new technologies—turning a strange, commercially loaded object into a familiar, taken-for-granted part of everyday life. Developed by Roger Silverstone and colleagues to understand media and information technologies in the home, it treats consumption not as a single moment of purchase but as an ongoing process through which artefacts are appropriated, given a place, woven into routines, and made to express identity. The household is analysed as a 'moral economy' that negotiates the meaning and use of every technology that crosses its threshold. | The Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) is a constructivist framework holding that technological artefacts are shaped by the interpretations and negotiations of relevant social groups rather than by technical logic alone. Introduced by Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker in 1984, it shows that an artefact has 'interpretive flexibility'—different groups see different problems and solutions in it—until a process of closure stabilises one design as the obvious one. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|