Marres Noortje
Goldsmiths, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Sci Technol Human Values. 2015 Sep;40(5):655-686. doi: 10.1177/0162243915574602.
This article takes stock of recent efforts to implement controversy analysis as a digital method in the study of science, technology, and society (STS) and beyond and outlines a distinctive approach to address the problem of digital bias. Digital media technologies exert significant influence on the enactment of controversy in online settings, and this risks undermining the substantive focus of controversy analysis conducted by digital means. To address this problem, I propose a shift in thematic focus from controversy analysis to issue mapping. The article begins by distinguishing between three broad frameworks that currently guide the development of controversy analysis as a digital method, namely, demarcationist, discursive, and empiricist. Each has been adopted in STS, but only the last one offers a digital "move beyond impartiality." I demonstrate this approach by analyzing issues of Internet governance with the aid of the social media platform Twitter.
本文总结了近期将争议分析作为一种数字方法应用于科学、技术与社会(STS)及其他领域研究的努力,并概述了一种解决数字偏见问题的独特方法。数字媒体技术对在线环境中争议的形成产生了重大影响,这有可能破坏通过数字手段进行的争议分析的实质重点。为解决这一问题,我提议将主题重点从争议分析转向议题映射。文章首先区分了目前指导作为数字方法的争议分析发展的三个广泛框架,即划界主义、话语主义和经验主义。每个框架都已在STS中采用,但只有最后一个框架提供了一种超越公正性的数字方法。我通过借助社交媒体平台推特分析互联网治理问题来展示这种方法。