The Social Construction of Facts and Artefacts: or How the Sociology of Science and the Sociology of Technology might Benefit Each Other

By T. Pinch, Wiebe Bijker. 1984

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Problem Formulation and Fairness (2019, neutral): “we define and measure phenomena [8,25,27,37].”
FROM WOMEN AND TECHNOLOGY TO GENDERED TECHNOSCIENCE (2007, background): “Introducing terms like ‘interpretative ﬂexibility’ and ‘domestication’ helps to capture the idea that the particular affordances of a technology are not given and predictable (Pinch & Bijker 1987; Haddon 2004).”
Social influence and consumer preference formation for pro-environmental technology: The case of a U.K. workplace electric-vehicle study (2013, background): “3) explains how consumer perceptions of emerging technologies are initially subject to interpretive flexibility — when there is controversy as to what benefits the technology provides or should provide (Pinch and Bijker, 1984).”
The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: A multi-level analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles (1860–1930) (2005, background): “The users were athletic young men, wanting to prove their skill, courage and strength.(45) These user preferences gave rise to the Penny-farthing that had a very large front wheel, which enabled high speed, but was unstable.”
Sociotechnical Harms of Algorithmic Systems: Scoping a Taxonomy for Harm Reduction (2022, background): “This work requires thinking critically about the distribution of benefits and harms of algorithmic systems [33, 169] and existing social hierarchies [35].”
Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay (1984, background): “Are they just as willing to call into question aspects of the social world which surrounds them? Technologists seem to have no trouble doing so (Callon, 1980; Pinch and Bijker, 1984).”
Sharing Meaning Across Occupational Communities: The Transformation of Understanding on a Production Floor (2003, background): “As sociologists of science have shown, groups interpret technologies in different ways, based on the social contexts in which they encounter them (Pinch and Bijker 1987, Mulkay 1979).”
INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN THE SPONSORSHIP OF COMMON TECHNOLOGICAL STANDARDS: THE CASE OF SUN MICROSYSTEMS AND JAVA * (2002, background): “Also, it would allow members of the Java bandwagon the flexibility to interpret the technology to suit their own purposes (Pinch and Bijker, 1987) and differentiate their product offerings from one another and from Sun’s own offerings.”