Although scholarship in the social construction of technology (SCOT) has contributed much to illuminating technological development, most work using this theoretical approach is committed to an agency-centered approach. SCOT scholars have made only limited contributions to illustrating the influence of social structures. In this article, the authors argue for the importance of structural concepts to understanding technological development. They summarize the SCOT conceptual framework defined by Trevor Pinch and Wiebe Bijker and survey some of the methodological and explanatory difficulties that arise with their approach. Then the authors present concepts from organizational sociology and political economy that illuminate structural influences in shaping phenomena of interest to SCOT scholars. These structural concepts can be applied to the study of the design, development, and transformation of technology. The authors conclude that the limited amount of scholarship on structural factors in the social shaping of technological development presents numerous opportunities for research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, Gordon. 1984. The politics of defense contracting: The iron triangle. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
2.
Allison, Graham. 1971. The essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis. Boston: Little, Brown.
3.
Bijker, Wiebe. 1987. The social construction of bakelite: Toward a theory of invention. In The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, edited by Wiebe Bijker, Thomas Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 17-50. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4.
Bijker, Wiebe. 1992. The social construction of fluorescent lighting, or how an artifact was invented in its diffusion stage. In Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change, edited by Wiebe Bijker and John Law, 75-102. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Bijker, Wiebe. 1995. Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
Collins, Harry. 1975. The seven sexes: A study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology9:205-224.
7.
Dunlavy, Colleen A.1994. Politics and industrialization: Early railroads in the United States and Prussia. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
8.
Elzen, Boelie. 1986. Two ultracentrifuges: A comparative study of the social construction of artifacts. Social Studies of Science16:621-662.
9.
Feenberg, Andrew. 1999. Questioning technology. New York: Routledge.
10.
Fujimura, Joan. 1996. Crafting science: A sociohistory of the quest for the genetics of cancer. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
Hall, Peter. 1986. Governing the economy: The politics of state intervention in Britain and France. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
12.
Haard, Michael. 1993. Beyond harmony and consensus: A social conflict approach to technology. Science, Technology, and Human Values18:408-432.
13.
Hooks, Gregory. 1991. Forging the military-industrial complex: World War II’s battle of the Potomac. Chicago: Illinois University Press.
14.
Hughes, Thomas P.1989. The evolution of large technical systems. The social construction of technical systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, edited by Wiebe E. Bijker, Thomas P. Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 51-82. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
Kleinman, Daniel Lee. 1995. Politics on the endless frontier: Postwar research policy in the United States. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
16.
Kleinman, Daniel Lee. 1998. Untangling context: Understanding a university laboratory in the commercial world. Science, Technology, and Human Values23:285-314.
17.
Kleinman, Daniel Lee, and Jack Kloppenburg. 1991. Aiming for the discursive high ground: Monstanto and the biotechnology controversy. Sociological Forum6:427-447.
18.
Kline, Ronald, and Trevor Pinch. 1996. Users as agents of technological change: The social construction of the automobile in the rural United States. Technology and Culture, 763-795.
19.
Kuhn, Thomas. 1970. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
21.
Lindberg, Leon. 1982. The problems of economic theory in explaining economic performance. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences459:14-27.
22.
Lindberg, Leon. 1985. Political economy, economic governance, and the coordination of economic activities. Wissenschaftskolleg Jahrbuch1984/85:241-255.
23.
Lorber, Judith. 1994. Paradoxes of gender. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
24.
Lukes, Steven. 1974. Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan.
25.
MacKenzie, Donald. 1990. Inventing accuracy: A historical sociology of nuclear missile guidance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26.
March, James, and Herbert Simon. 1958. Organizations. New York: John Wiley.
27.
March, James, and Johan Olsen. 1976. Ambiguity and choice in organizations. Bergen, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
28.
McAdam, Doug. 1982. Political process and the development of black insurgency, 1930-1970. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
29.
McNaugher, Thomas. 1989. New weapons, old politics: America’s procurement muddle. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
30.
Meyer, John W., and Brian Rowan. 1977. Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology83:340-363.
31.
Michels, Robert. 1962. Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy. New York: Collier.
32.
Misa, Thomas. 1992. Controversy and closure in technological change: Constructing steel. In Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change, edited by Wiebe Bijker and John Law.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.
Misa, Thomas J.1995. A nation of steel: The making of modern America, 1865-1925. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
34.
Neil, Suzanne, Lee McKnight, and Joseph Bailey. 1995. The government’s role in the HDTV standards process: Model or aberration? In Standards policy for information infrastructure, edited by B. Kahin and J. Abbate. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35.
Noble, David. 1984. The forces of production: A social history of industrial automation. New York: Knopf.
36.
Pfeffer, Jeffrey, and Gerald Salancik. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.
37.
Pickering, Andrew. 1984. Constructing quarks—A sociological history of particle physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38.
Pickering, Andrew. 1993. The mangle of practice: Agency and emergence in the sociology of science.”American Journal of Sociology99 (3): 559-589.
39.
Pickering, Andrew. 1995. The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
40.
Pinch, Trevor. 1977. What does a proof do if it does not prove? A study of the social conditions and the metaphysical divisions leading to David Bohm and John von Neumann failing to communicate in quantum physics. In The social production of scientific knowledge, edited by E. Mendelsohn, P. Weingart, and R. Whitley, 175-215. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Reidel.
41.
Pinch, Trevor. 1996. The social construction of technology: A review. In Technological change: Methods and themes in the history of technology, edited by Robert Fox, 17-35. Australia: Harwood Academic Publishers.
42.
Pinch, Trevor, and Wiebe Bijker. 1987. The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology, edited by Wiebe Bijker, Thomas Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 17-50. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43.
Powell, Walter, and Paul DiMaggio. 1991. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
Rip, Arie. 1995. Introduction of new technology: Making use of recent insights from sociology and economics of technology. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management7 (4): 417-431.
45.
Rosen, Paul. 1993. The social construction of mountain bikes: Technology and postmodernity in the cycle industry. Social Studies of Science23:479-513.
46.
Russell, Stewart. 1986. The social construction of artifacts: A response to Pinch and Bijker. Social Studies of Science16:331-346.
47.
Schneiberg, Marc. 1994. Private order and inter-firm governance in the American fire insurance industry, 1820-1950. Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin-Madison.
48.
Schot, Johan W.1992. Constructive technology assessment and dynamics: The case of clean technologies. Science, Technology, and Human Values17 (1): 36-56.
49.
Schot, Johan, and Arie Rip.1996. The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technological Forecasting and Social Change54:251-268.
50.
Selznick, Philip. 1980. TVA and the grass roots: A study of politics and organization. Berkeley: University of California Press.
51.
Shils, Edward A., and Henry A. Finch, eds. 1949. Max Weber on the methodology of the social sciences. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
52.
Strasser, Susan. 1989. Satisfaction guaranteed: The making of the American mass market. New York: Pantheon.
53.
Wilensky, Harold L., and Lowell Turner. 1987. Democratic corporatism and policy linkages. Berkeley: Institute for International Studies, University of California.
54.
Williams, Robin, and David Edge. 1996. The social shaping of technology. Research Policy25:865-899.
55.
Williamson, Judith. 1978. Decoding advertisements. London: Marion Boyars.
56.
Winner, Langdon. 1993. Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology. Science, Technology, and Human Values18:362-378.
57.
Woodforde, John. 1970. The story of the bicycle. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
58.
Wright, Susan. 1994. Molecular politics: Developing American and British regulatory policy for genetic engineering, 1972-1982. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
