Socio-Technical Interaction Networks: A Discussion of the Strengths, Weaknesses and Future of Kling’s STIN Model

  • Eric T. Meyer
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 223)


The Socio-Technical Interaction Network (STIN) strategy for social informatics research was published late in Rob Kling’s life, and as a result, he did not have time to pursue its continued development. This paper aims to summarize existing work on STINs, identify key themes, strengths, weaknesses and limitations, and to suggest trajectories for the future of STIN research. The STIN strategy for research on socio-technical systems offers the potential for useful insights into the highly intertwined nature of social factors and technological systems, however a number of areas of the strategy remain underdeveloped and offer the potential for future refinement and modification.


Social informatics Socio-Technical Interaction Networks STIN Rob Kling 


  1. Barab, S., Schatz, S., & Scheckler. R. (2004). Using Activity Theory of Conceptualize Online Community and Using Online Community to Conceptualize Activity Theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(1), 25–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bijker, W. E. (1995). Of Bicycles, Bakelites and Bulbs: Toward a Theory of Sociotechnical Change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bijker, W. E. (2001). Social Construction of Technology. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), Internaltional Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Vol. 23, pp. 15522–15527). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.Google Scholar
  4. Bowen, G. (1995). Coming of Age in STS: Some methodological musings. In S. Jasanoff, G. E. Markle, J. C. Petersen & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies (pp. 64–79). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, S. D., & Capdevilla, R. (1999). Perpetuum Mobile: substance, force and the sociology of translatioin. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor Network Theory and after (pp. 26–50). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Callon, M. (1986). Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domesticatioin of the Scallops and Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, Action and Belief: A New Sociology of Knowledge?. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Callon, M. (1987). Society in the Makiing: The Study of Technology as a Tool for Social Analysis. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes & T. Pinch (Eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 83–103). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Eschenfelder, K. R., & Chase, L. C. (2002). Socio-Technical Networks of Large, Post-Implementation Web Information Systems: Tracing Effects and Influences. Paper presented at the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island, Hawaii.Google Scholar
  9. Hanseth, O., Aanestad, M., & Berg, M. (2004). Actor-network theory and information systems. What’s so special? Information Technology and People, 17(2), 116–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Joung, K. H., & Rosenbaum, H. (2004), November 13–18. Digital libraries as socio-technical interaction networks: A study of the American Memory Project. Paper presented at the ASIST 2004 Annual Meeting; ‘Managing and Enhancing Information: Cultures and Conflicts’ (ASIST AM 04), Providence, Rhode Island.Google Scholar
  11. Kling, R. (1991). Computerization and Social Transformations. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 16(3), 342–367.Google Scholar
  12. Kling, R. (1992). Behind the Terminal: The Critical Role of Computing Infrastructure in Effective Information Systems’ Development and Use. In W. Cotterman & J. Senn (Eds.), Challenges and Strategies for Research in Systems Development (pp. 153–201). London: John Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Kling, R., McKim, G., & King, A. (2003). A Bit More to IT: Scholarly Communication Forums as Socio-Technical Interaction Networks. Journal of the American Sociefy for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 46–67.Google Scholar
  14. Kling, R., & Scacchi, W. (1982). The Web of Computing: Computer Technology as Social Organization. Advances in Computers, 21, 1–90.Google Scholar
  15. Kling, R., Spector, L., & Fortuna, J. (2004). The Real Stakes of Virtual Publishing: The Transformation of E-Biomed Into PubMed Central. Journal of the American Society of Information Science & Technology, 55(2), 127–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lamb, R., & Kling, R. (2003). Reconceptualizing Users and Social Actors in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly, 27(2), 197–235.Google Scholar
  17. Lamb, R., & Sawyer, S. (2005). On extending social informatics from a rich legacy of networks and conceptual resources. Information Technology & People 18(1), 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lamb, R., Sawyer, S., & Kling, R. (2000). A Social Informatics Perspective on Socio-Technical Networks. In H. M. Chung (Ed.), Proceedings ofthe Americas Conference on Information Systems. Long Beach, CA.Google Scholar
  19. Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How tofollow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Latour, B. (1988). Mixing Humans and Nonhumans Together: The Sociology of a Door-Closer. Social Problems, 35(3), 298–310.Google Scholar
  21. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Law, J. (1999). After ANT: complexity, naming and topology. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor Network Theory and afler (pp. 1–14). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  23. Markus, M. L., & Keil, M. (1994). If we build it, they will come: Designing information systems that people want to use. Sloan Management Review, 35(4), 11–25.Google Scholar
  24. Meyer, E. T., & Kling, R. (2002). Leveling the playingfield, or expanding the bleachers? Socio-Technical Interaction Networks and (Center for Social Informatics Working Paper Series WP-02-10), Retrieved April 2, 2002, from Scholar
  25. Mohr, H. (1999). Technology Assessment in Theory and Practice. Techné: Research in Philosophy & Technology, 4(4), 22–25.Google Scholar
  26. Orlikowski, W. J., & Iacono, C. S. (2001). Research commentary: Desperately seeking the ‘IT’ in IT research-A call to theorizing the IT artifact. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 121–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1987). The Social Construction of Facts and Artifacts: Or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology Might Benefit Each Other. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes & T. Pinch (Eds.), The Social Construction of Technological Systems (pp. 17–50). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Robbin, A. (2005, March 11–12). Rob Kling In Search of One Good Theory: The Origins of Computerization Movements. Paper presented at the workshop ‘Extending the Contributions of Professor Rob Kling to the Analysis of Computerization Movements’, Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
  29. Sawyer, S. (2005). Social Informatics: Overview, Principles and Opportunities. Bulletin ofthe American Society for Information Science and Technology, 31(5), 9–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sawyer, S., & Tapia, A. (2005, March 11–12). From Findings to Theories: Institutionalizing Social Informatics. Paper presented at the workshop ‘Extending the Contributions of Professor Rob Kling to the Analysis of Computerization Movements’, Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
  31. Scacchi, W. (2005). Socio-Technical Interaction Networks in Freelopen Source Software Development Processes. In S. T. Acuña & N. Juristo (Eds.), Software Process Modeling (pp. 1–27). New York: Springer Science+Business Media Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Star, S. L. (1988). Introduction: The Sociology of Science and Technology. Social Problems, 35(3), 197–205.Google Scholar
  33. Suchman, L. (1996). Supporting Articulation Work. In R. Kling (Ed.), Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices, 2nd. Ed. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eric T. Meyer
    • 1
  1. 1.Rob Kling Center for Social InformaticsIndiana UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations