Advertisement

The American Sociologist

, Volume 44, Issue 1, pp 42–53 | Cite as

Public Sociology and the Democratization of Technology: Drawing on User -led Research to Achieve Mutual Education

  • Benjamin KellyEmail author
  • Khosrow Farahbakhsh
Article

Abstract

In an effort to further advance public sociology and its relationship with technology, this paper looks at a democratic model of collaboration within the technological sciences. We draw on the concept of user- led research to demonstrate how sociologists, scientists and various stakeholders within the public sphere can achieve reciprocal, meaningful and sustained knowledge translation. Furthermore, we argue that by acknowledging participants’ technological needs and reducing unnecessary complexity, the user -led method advances Burawoy’s “dialogue as mutual education” within public sociology.

Keywords

Public sociology Mode 2 science Mutual education Democratization of technology 

References

  1. Adler, M., & Williams, R. (1991). The social implications of the DSS operational strategy. Edinburgh: Social Policy Series.Google Scholar
  2. Adorjan, M. (2012). “Igniting constructionist imaginations: Social constructionism’s absence and potential contribution to public sociology.” The American Sociologist. doi: 10.1007/s12108-012-9172-3.
  3. Burawoy, M. (2004). Public sociologies. A symposium from Boston College. Social Problems, 51, 103–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burawoy, M. (2005). For public sociology. American Sociological Review, 70, 4–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cayley, D. (2009). Ideas on the nature of science. Toronto: Goose Lane Editions.Google Scholar
  6. Epstein, S. (1996). Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Franklin, U. (1990). The real world of technology. Toronto: House of Anansi Press.Google Scholar
  8. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The New production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
  10. Hamlett, P. (2003). Technology theory and deliberative democracy. Science, Technology & Human Values, 28, 112–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Helmes-Hayes, R., & McLaughlin, N. (2009). Public sociology in Canada: debates, research and historical contexts. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 34, 573–600.Google Scholar
  12. McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  13. Messer-Davidow, E. (1993). Manufacturing the attack on liberalized higher education. Social Text, 36, 40–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Moriarty, P., Fonseca, C., Smits, S. & Schouten, T. (2005). “Background Paper for the Symposium: Learning Alliances for Scaling Up Innovative Approaches in the Water and Sanitation Sector.” IRC International Water and Sanitation Center. http://www.irc.nl/content/download/16138/208040/file/Background_paper_symposium_.pdf
  15. Nichols, L. (2003). Voices of social problems: a dialogical constructionist model. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 26, 93–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nowotny, N., Scott, P., & Gibbons, M. (2001). Re-thinking science: Knowledge and the public in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  17. Orpwood, R., Chadd, J., Howcroft, D., Sixsmith, A., Torrington, J., Gibson, G. & Chalfont, G. (2008). User-led Design of Technology to Improve Quality of Life for People with Dementia. In P. Langdon, J. Clarkson and P. Robinson (Eds), Designing Inclusive Futures. Springer Publishing.Google Scholar
  18. Procter, R., Hartswood, M., Sharpe, M. & Doris A. (1999). A Case Study of User-Led Systems Design and Development in Healthcare Informatics. In Proceedings of the workshop on How to Make User Centred Design More Usable, INTERACT’99, Edinburgh, August, 1999.Google Scholar
  19. von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. Tainter, J. A. (1988). The collapse of complex societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Taylor, P. & Leendertse, K. (2005). “Capacity Building Networks - An Effective Way to Scale Up Capacity Building.” Proceedings of the Symposium on Learning Alliances for Scaling Up Innovative Approaches in the Water and Sanitation Sector; 7–9 June 2005, Delft, the Netherlands.Google Scholar
  22. Woodhouse, E., Hess, D., Breyman, S., & Martin, B. (2002). Science studies and activism. Social Studies of Science, 32, 297–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nipissing UniversityNorth BayCanada
  2. 2.University of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations