Towards a Sociological Conception of Artificial Intelligence

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10999)


Social sciences have been always formed and influenced by the development of society, adjusting the conceptual, methodological, and theoretical frameworks to emerging social phenomena. In recent years, with the leap in the advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the proliferation of its everyday applications, “non-human intelligent actors” are increasingly becoming part of the society. This is manifested in the evolving realms of smart home systems, autonomous vehicles, chatbots, intelligent public displays, etc. In this paper, we present a prospective research project that takes one of the pioneering steps towards establishing a “distinctively sociological” conception of AI. Its first objective is to extract the existing conceptions of AI as perceived by its technological developers and (possibly differently) by its users. In the second part, capitalizing on a set of interviews with experts from social science domains, we will explore the new imaginable conceptions of AI that do not originate from its technological possibilities but rather from societal necessities. The current formal ways of defining AI are grounded in the technological possibilities, namely machine learning methods and neural network models. But what exactly is AI as a social phenomenon, which may act on its own, can be blamed responsible for ethically problematic behavior, or even endanger people’s employment? We argue that such conceptual investigation is a crucial step for further empirical studies of phenomena related to AI’s position in current societies, but also will open up ways for critiques of new technological advancements with social consequences in mind from the outset.


Artificial intelligence Sociology Social sciences 


  1. 1.
    Wittgenstein, L.: Philosophical Investigations. Basil Blackwell, Oxford (1953)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Greenfield, A.: Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. New Riders, Berkeley (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bauman, Z.: Úvahy o postmoderní době [Thoughts on the Postmodern Age]. Sociologické nakladatelství SLON, Prague (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lindemann, G.: The analysis of the borders of the social world: a challenge for sociological theory. J. Theor. Soc. Behav. 35, 69–98 (2005). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dunlap, R.E., Catton Jr., W.R.: Environmental sociology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 5, 243–273 (1979). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bryant, C.: The zoological connection: animal related human behavior. Soc. Forces 58, 399–421 (1979). Scholar
  7. 7.
    MacKenzie, D., Wajcman, J. (eds.): The Social Shaping of Technology. Open University Press, Milton Keynes/Philadelphia (1985)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nilsson, N.J.: The Quest for Artificial Intelligence: A History of Ideas and Achievements. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carley, K.M.: Artificial intelligence within sociology. Sociol. Method. Res. 25, 3–30 (1996). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Brent, E.E.: Is There a Role for Artificial Intelligence in Sociological Theorizing? Am. Sociol. 19, 158–166 (1988). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bainbridge, W.S., Brent, E.E., Carley, K.M., Heise, D.R., Macy, M.W., Markovsky, B., Skvoretz, J.: Artificial social intelligence. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 20, 407–436 (1994). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Woolgar, S.: Why not a sociology of machines? The case of sociology and artificial intelligence. Sociology 19, 557–572 (1985). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wolfe, A.: Mind, self, society, and computer: artificial intelligence and the sociology of mind. Am. J. Sociol. 96, 1073–1096 (1991). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schwartz, R.D.: Artificial intelligence as a sociological phenomenon. Can. J. Sociol. 14, 179–202 (1989). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Malsch, T.: Naming the unnamable: socionics or the sociological turn of/to distributed artificial intelligence. Auton. Agent. Multi-Agent Syst. 4, 155–186 (2001). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Latour, B.: Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Callon, M., Latour, B.: Unscrewing the big Leviathan. In: Knorr Cetina, K.D., Mulay, M. (eds.) Advances in Social Theory and Methodology, pp. 196–223. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London (1981)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Muhle, F.: Embodied conversational agents as social actors? Sociological considerations on the change of human-machine relations in online environments. In: Gehl, R.W., Bakardjieva, M. (eds.) Socialbots and their Friends: Digital Media and the Automation of Society, pp. 86–109. Routledge, New York/London (2017)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Laurier, E., Brown, B., McGregor, M.: Mediated pedestrian mobility: walking and the map app. Mobilities 11, 117–134 (2016). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Esteva, A., Kuprel, B., Novoa, R.A., Ko, J., Swetter, S.M., Blau, H.M., Thrun, S.: Dermatologist-level classification of skin cancer with deep neural networks. Nature 542, 115 (2017). Scholar
  21. 21.
    Siemens, G., Long, P.: Penetrating the fog: analytics in learning and education. EDUCAUSE Rev. 46, 30 (2011). Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brambilla, A., Alavi, H., Verma, H., Lalanne, D., Jusselme, T., Andersen, M.: “Our inherent desire for control”: a case study of automation’s impact on the perception of comfort. Energy Proced. 122, 925–930 (2017). Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alavi, H.S., Verma, H., Bahrami, F., Lalanne, D.: Is driverless car another Weiserian mistake? In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems, pp. 249–253. ACM, New York (2017).
  24. 24.
    Ross, D.A., Blasch, B.B.: Wearable interfaces for orientation and wayfinding. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International ACM Conference on Assistive Technologies, pp. 193–200. ACM, New York (2000).
  25. 25.
    Shen, H., Chan, K.Y., Coughlan, J., Brabyn, J.: A mobile phone system to find crosswalks for visually impaired pedestrians. Technol. Disabil. 20, 217–224 (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alavi, H.S., Churchill, E., Kirk, D., Bier, H., Verma, H., Lalanne, D., Schnädelbach, H.: From artifacts to architecture. In: Proceedings of the 19th International ACM SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility, pp. 387–390. ACM, New York (2018).
  27. 27.
    Alavi, H.S., Lalanne, D., Nembrini, J., Churchill, E., Kirk, D., Moncur, W.: Future of human-building interaction. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3408–3414. ACM, New York (2016).
  28. 28.
    Alavi, H.S., Churchill, E., Kirk, D., Nembrini, J., Lalanne, D.: Deconstructing human-building interaction. Interactions 23, 60–62 (2016). Scholar
  29. 29.
    Krippendorff, K.: Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. SAGE, Thousand Oaks/London/New Delhi (2004)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fairclough, N.: Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge, London/New York (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Garfinkel, H.: Studies in Ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1967)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Garfinkel, H.: Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham (2002)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sacks, H.: Lectures on Conversation I-II. Blackwell, Oxford (1992)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raav, J., Soeffner, H.-G. (eds.): Video Analysis: Methodology and Methods. Lang, Bern (2006)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hartmann, D.: Sociology and its publics: reframing engagement and revitalizing the field. Sociol. Q. 58, 3–18 (2016). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Charles UniversityPrahaCzech Republic
  2. 2.University of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
  3. 3.University College LondonLondonUK
  4. 4.University of LuganoLuganoSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations