This link has been bookmarked by 71 people . It was first bookmarked on 25 Nov 2006, by Todd Suomela.
-
20 Aug 14
-
treats objects as part of social networks
-
the clusters of actors involved in creating meaning are both material and semiotic
-
It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act
-
-
-
ts controversial insistence on the capacity of nonhumans to act or participate in systems or networks or both, ANT is also associated with forceful critiques of conventional and critical sociology.
-
t maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic
-
NT is a constructivist approach in that it avoids essentialist explanations of events or innovations (e.g. explaining a successful theory by understanding the combinations and interactions of elements that make it successful, rather than saying it is “true” and the others are “false”).
-
From about 1990 onwards, ANT started to become popular as a tool for analysis in a range of fields beyond STS. It was picked up and developed by authors in parts of organizational analysis, informatics, health studies, geography, sociology, anthropology, feminist studies and economics.
-
ANT does not usually explain “why” or "how" a network takes the form that it does.[3] Rather, ANT is a way of thoroughly exploring the relational ties within a network (which can be a multitude of different things).
-
Actor–network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole; the clusters of actors involved in creating meaning are both material and semiotic.
-
This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve. They also assume that networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts. Social relations, in other words, are only ever in process, and must be performed continuously.
-
It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act (and that there are only enacted alliances.) As soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the entelechy
-
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends to cease as well.
-
This can also occur when elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole. In his book Pandora’s Hope, Latour likens depunctualization to the opening of a black box. When closed, the box is perceived simply as a box, although when it is opened all elements inside it becomes visible.
-
distinction between intermediaries and mediators is key to ANT sociology. Intermediaries are entities which make no difference (to some interesting state of affairs which we are studying) and so can be ignored. They transport the force of some other entity more or less without transformation and so are fairly uninteresting. Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study. Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs. From an ANT point of view sociology has tended to treat too much of the world as intermediaries.
-
sociology of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending.
-
Actor–network theory insists on the capacity of nonhumans to be actors or participants in networks and systems.
-
ANT scholars[who?] respond with the following arguments:
-
mplies that ANT does not account for pre-existing structures, such as power, but rather sees these structures as emerging from the actions of actors within the network and their ability to align in pursuit of their interests. Accordingly, ANT can be seen as an attempt to re-introduce Whig history into science and technology studies; like the myth of the heroic inventor, ANT can be seen as an attempt to explain successful innovators by saying only that they were successful. Likewise, for organization studies, Whittle and Spicer assert that ANT is, "ill suited to the task of developing political alternatives to the imaginaries of market managerialism."
-
-
19 Aug 14
-
Developed by science and technology studies (STS) scholars Michel Callon and Bruno Latour, the sociologist John Law, and others, it can more technically be described as a "material-semiotic" method.
-
This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic.
-
Although it is called a “theory”, ANT does not usually explain “why” or "how" a network takes the form that it does.[3] Rather, ANT is a way of thoroughly exploring the relational ties within a network (which can be a multitude of different things). As Latour notes,[4] "explanation does not follow from description; it is description taken that much further." It is not, in other words, a theory "of" anything, but rather a method, or a "how-to book" as Latour [3] puts it.
-
Actor–network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole; the clusters of actors involved in creating meaning are both material and semiotic.
-
As a part of this it may look at explicit strategies for relating different elements together into a network so that they form an apparently coherent whol
-
These networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making.[3] This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve. They also assume that networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts. Social relations, in other words, are only ever in process, and must be performed continuously.
-
As soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the entelechy.
-
punctualisation
-
ANT is often associated with the equal treatment of human and non-human actors
-
ntermediaries are entities which make no difference (to some interesting state of affairs which we are studying) and so can be ignored. They transport the force of some other entity more or less without transformation and so are fairly uninteresting. Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study. Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs. From an ANT point of view sociology has tended to treat too much of the world as intermediaries.
-
-
17 Aug 14
-
Actor–network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is an approach to social theory and research, originating in the field of science studies, which treats objects as part of social networks.
-
ANT is a constructivist approach in that it avoids essentialist explanations of events or innovations
-
-
15 Aug 14
-
best known for its controversial insistence on the capacity of nonhumans to act or participate in systems or networks or both
-
treats objects as part of social networks.
-
it can more technically be described as a "material-semiotic" method.
-
It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic.
-
ANT is a way of thoroughly exploring the relational ties within a network (which can be a multitude of different things).
-
-
ANT is often associated with the equal treatment of human and non-human actors. ANT assumes that all entities in a network can and should be described in the same terms. This is called the principle of generalized symmetry.
-
Central to ANT is the concept of translation which is sometimes referred to as sociology of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending.
-
the clusters of actors involved in creating meaning are both material and semiotic.
-
These networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making.
-
This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
They also assume that networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts.
-
It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act (and that there are only enacted alliances.)
-
As soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the entelechy.
-
Critics including figures such as Langdon Winner maintain that such properties as intentionality fundamentally distinguish humans from animals or from “things”
-
A car is an example of a complex system. It contains many electronic and mechanical components, all of which are essentially hidden from view to the driver, who simply deals with the car as a single object. This effect is known as punctualisation
-
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends to cease as well. In the automobile example above, a non-working engine would cause the driver to become aware of the car as a collection of parts rather than just a vehicle capable of transporting him
-
This can also occur when elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole. In his book Pandora’s Hope, Latour likens depunctualization to the opening of a black box. When closed, the box is perceived simply as a box, although when it is opened all elements inside it becomes visible.
-
-
29 Oct 13
-
26 Mar 13
-
agent-based approach
-
which treats objects as part of social networks
-
This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts)
-
"material-semiotic" method
-
ANT is a way of thoroughly exploring the relational ties within a network
-
"it has no a priori order relation; it is not tied to the axiological myth of a top and of a bottom of society; it makes absolutely no assumption whether a specific locus is macro- or micro- and does not modify the tools to study the element 'a' or the element 'b'."
-
Actor–network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole
-
These networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making.
-
This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts
-
only ever in process, and must be performed continuously
-
If taken to its logical conclusion, then, nearly any actor can be considered merely a sum of other, smaller actors.
-
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends to cease as well.
-
likens depunctualization to the opening of a black box. When closed, the box is perceived simply as a box, although when it is opened all elements inside it becomes visible.
-
Intermediaries are entities which make no difference
-
transport the force of some other entity more or less without transformation
-
and so can be ignored
-
outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs
-
Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study
-
in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending
-
Central to ANT is the concept of translation
-
4 moments of translation: problematisation, interessment, enrollment and mobilisation of allies.
-
-
13 Apr 12
-
21 Mar 12
-
Actor–network theory, often abbreviated as ANT
-
between things) and semiotic (between concepts).
-
"material-semiotic" method.
-
maps relations that are simultaneously material (
-
material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole (
-
they form an apparently coherent whole
-
potentially transient,
-
existing in a constant making and re-making
-
relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
faithful to the insights of ethnomethodology and its detailed descriptions of how common activities, habits and procedures sustain themselves.
-
mapping innovations in science and technology (“co-word analysis”)
-
referred to as s
-
ociology of translation,
-
forum
-
1. Problematisation W
-
2. Interessement
-
3. Enrollment
-
4. Mobilization of allies
-
actants to denote human and non-human actors,
-
actants in a network take the shape that they do by virtue of their relations with one another.
-
-
20 Mar 12
-
distinctive approach to social theory and research
-
a "material-semiotic" method. This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts)
-
s that many relations are both material and semiotic. For example, the interactions in a school involve children, teachers, their ideas, and technologies (such as tables, chairs, computers and stationery). Together these form a single network.
-
It assume
-
re-makin
-
actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-makin
-
relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
methodological stance that researchers can take in their analysis
-
Translation
Central to ANT is the concept of translation which is sometimes referred to as sociology of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending. In his widely debated 1986 study of how marine biologists try to restock the St Brieuc Bay in order to produce more scallops,[4] Michel Callon has defined 4 moments
-
of translation. These four moments are derived from studying:
1. Problematisation What is the problem that needs to be solved? Who are the relevant actors? Delegates need to be identified that will represent groups of actors. So, a union head represents workers or a member of parliament represents his constituency. During problematisation, the primary actor tries to establish itself as an obligatory passage point (OPP) between the other actors and the network, so that it becomes indispensable.
2. Interessement
Makes other actors interested and accepted the definition of primary actors. The primary actor works to convince the other actors that the roles it has defined for them are acceptable.
3. Enrollment
Where other actors receive interests defined by the main actors.
4. Mobilization of allies
Do the delegate actors in the network adequately represent the masses? If so, enrollment becomes active support.
[edit]
-
Intermediaries and mediators
-
Intermediaries are entities which make no difference (to some interesting state of affairs which we are studying) and so can be ignored. They transport the force of some other entity more or less without transformation and so are fairly uninteresting. Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study. Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs.
-
Actants
ANT defines, for instance, actants to denote human and non-human actors, and assumes that actants in a network take the shape that they do by virtue of their relations with one another. It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act (and that there are only enacted alliances.) As soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the “Entelechy”.
-
Punctualisation
If taken to its logical conclusion, nearly any actor can be considered merely a sum of other, smaller actors. A car is an example of a complex system. It contains many electronic and mechanical components, all of which are essentially hidden from view to the driver, who simply deals with the car as a single object.
-
-
19 Mar 12
-
This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It
-
assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic.
-
-
18 Mar 12
-
Actor–network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies.
-
Developed by science and technology studies scholars Michel Callon and Bruno Latour, the sociologist John Law, and others, it can more technically be described as a "material-semiotic" method.
-
This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic
-
According to actor–network theory, such actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making
-
This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve
-
Although it is called a “theory”, ANT does not usually explain “why” a network takes the form that it does. It is much more interested in exploring how actor-networks get formed, hold themselves together, or fall apart. It is not, in other words, a theory "of" anything, but rather a methodological stance that researchers can take in their analysis.
-
Broadly speaking, ANT is a constructivist approach in that it avoids essentialist explanations of events or innovations (e.g. explaining a successful theory by saying it is “true” and the others are “false”). However, it is distinguished from many other STS and sociological network theory for its distinct material-semiotic approach.
-
ANT appears to reflect many of the preoccupations of French post-structuralism, and in particular a concern with non-foundational and multiple material-semiotic relations.
-
Its links with (largely US) work on large technical systems were reflected in its willingness to analyse large scale technological developments in an even-handed manner to include political, organizational, legal, technical and scientific factors.
-
sociology of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending.
-
Michel Callon has defined 4 moments of translation. These four moments are derived from studying:
-
Problematisation
-
Interessement
-
Enrollment
-
Mobilization of allies
-
Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study. Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs. From an ANT point of view sociology has tended to treat too much of the world as intermediaries.
-
ANT assumes that all the elements in a network, human and non-human, can and should be described in the same terms. This is called the principle of generalized symmetry
-
ANT defines, for instance, actants to denote human and non-human actors, and assumes that actants in a network take the shape that they do by virtue of their relations with one another.
-
Tokens/quasi-objects
-
As the token is increasingly transmitted or passed through the network, it becomes increasingly punctualized and also increasingly reified.
-
Criticism
-
ANT has been criticized as amoral.
-
Some critics[who?] have argued that research based on ANT perspectives remains entirely descriptive and fails to provide explanations for social processes.
-
ANT—like comparable social scientific methods—requires judgment calls from the researcher as to which actors are important within a network and which are not
-
Other research perspectives such as social constructionism, social network theory, Normalization Process Theory, Diffusion of Innovations theory are held to be important alternatives to ANT approaches
-
-
-
This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic. For example, the interactions in a school involve children, teachers, their ideas, and technologies (such as tables, chairs, computers and stationery). Together these form a single network.
-
Actor–network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole
-
As a part of this it may look at explicit strategies for relating different elements together into a network so that they form an apparently coherent whole.
-
According to actor–network theory, such actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making [1]. This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
Social relations, in other words, are only ever in process, and must be performed continuously.
-
-
16 Mar 12
-
Actor–network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies. Although it is best known for its controversial insistence on the agency of nonhumans,
-
maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic. For example, the interactions in a school involve children, teachers, their ideas, and technologies (such as tables, chairs, computers and stationery). Together these form a single network.
-
a school is both a network and an actor that hangs together, and for certain purposes acts as a single entity).
-
According to actor–network theory, such actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making
-
This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve
-
They also assume that networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts
-
Central to ANT is the concept of translation which is sometimes referred to as sociology of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending. In his widely debated 1986 study of how marine biologists try to restock the St Brieuc Bay in order to produce more scallops,[4] Michel Callon has defined 4 moments of translation. These four moments are derived from studying:
1. Problematisation What is the problem that needs to be solved? Who are the relevant actors? Delegates need to be identified that will represent groups of actors. So, a union head represents workers or a member of parliament represents his constituency. During problematisation, the primary actor tries to establish itself as an obligatory passage point (OPP) between the other actors and the network, so that it becomes indispensable.
2. Interessement
Makes other actors interested and accepted the definition of primary actors. The primary actor works to convince the other actors that the roles it has defined for them are acceptable.
3. Enrollment
Where other actors receive interests defined by the main actors.
4. Mobilization of allies
Do the delegate actors in the network adequately represent the masses? If so, enrollment becomes active support.
-
Actants
ANT defines, for instance, actants to denote human and non-human actors, and assumes that actants in a network take the shape that they do by virtue of their relations with one another. It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act (and that there are only enacted alliances.) As soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the “Entelechy”.
-
-
08 Jan 12
duncanbain"Actor–network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies. Although it is best known for its controversial insistence on the agency of nonhumans, ANT is also associated with forceful critiques of conventional and critical sociology."
-
For example, the interactions in a school involve children, teachers, their ideas, and technologies (such as tables, chairs, computers and stationery). Together these form a single network.
-
Actor–network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole (for example, a school is both a network and an actor that hangs together, and for certain purposes acts as a single entity).
-
According to actor–network theory, such actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making [1]. This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve. (The teachers need to come to work each day, and the computers need to keep on running.)
-
Central to ANT is the concept of translation which is sometimes referred to as sociology of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending.
-
-
30 Aug 11
-
06 Aug 11
-
30 Mar 11
-
Although it is called a “theory” ANT does not usually explain “why” a network takes the form that it does. It is much more interested in exploring how actor-networks get formed, hold themselves together, or fall apart. It is not, in other words, a theory "of" anything, but rather a methodological stance that researchers can take in their analysis.
-
detailed descriptions of how common activities, habits and procedures sustain themselves
-
seek to frame social circumstances as various forms of relationships associated with situations.
-
ANT is a constructivist approach in that it avoids essentialist explanations of events or innovations (e.g. explaining a successful theory by saying it is “true” and the others are “false”
-
distinct material-semiotic approach
-
h non-foundational and multiple material-semiotic relations. At the same time, it was much more firmly embedded in English-language academic traditions than most post-structuralist-influenced approaches
-
Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs.
-
Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study.
-
In such a view the real world silk-nylon difference is irrelevant — presumably many other material differences could also, and do also, transport this class distinction.
-
But taken as mediators these fabrics would have to be engaged with by the analyst in their specificity: the internal real-world complexities of silk and nylon suddenly appear relevant, and are seen as actively constructing the ideological class distinction which they once merely reflected.
-
must constantly be constructed or performed anew through complex engagements with complex mediators
-
There is no stand-alone social repertoire lying in the background to be reflected off, expressed through, or substantiated in, interactions (as in an intermediary conception
-
In his book Pandora’s Hope, Latour likens depunctualization to the opening of a black box
-
ANT has been criticized as amoral. Wiebe Bijker has responded to this criticism by stating that the amorality of ANT is not a necessity. Moral and political positions are possible, but one must first describe the network before taking up such positions.
-
-
21 Mar 11
-
18 Mar 11
-
17 Mar 11
-
takes the form that it does. It is much more interested in exploring how
-
takes the form that it does. It is much more interested in exploring how
-
Actor-network theory
-
Actor-network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies.
-
Actor-network theory , often abbreviated as ANT , is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies .
-
-
it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and semiotic (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic.
-
described as a "material-semiotic" method
-
Actor-network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole (for example, a school is both a network and an actor that hangs together, and for certain purposes acts as a single entity). As a part of this it may look at explicit strategies for relating different elements together into a network so that they form an apparently coherent whole
-
According to actor-network theory, such actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making [1]. This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
They also assume that networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts (there may be adversarial relations between teachers/children, or computer software may be incompatible). Social relations, in other words, are only ever in process, and must be performed continuously.
-
(The teachers need to come to work each day, and the computers need to keep on running.)
-
Some concepts
-
Some concepts
[edit] Translation
-
3. Enrollment
Actors accept the roles that have been defined for them during interessement.
-
Translation
-
Actants to denote human and non-human actors, and assumes that actants in a network take the shape that they do by virtue of their relations with one another. It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act (and that there are only enacted alliances.) As soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the “Entelechy”.
-
Although it is called a “theory” ANT does not usually explain “why” a network takes the form that it does. It is much more interested in exploring how actor-networks get formed, hold themselves together, or fall apart. It is not, in other words, a theory "of" anything, but rather a methodological stance that researchers can take in their analysis.
-
Many of thecharacteristic ANT tools (including the notions of translation, generalized symmetry and the “heterogeneous network
-
characteristic ANT tools (including the notions of translation, generalized
-
”),
-
Central to ANT is the concept of translation which is sometimes referred to as Sociology of Translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending.
-
1. Problematisation What is the problem that needs to be solved? Who are the relevant actors? Delegates need to be identified that will represent groups of actors. So, a union head represents workers or a Member of Parliament represents his constituency. During problematisation, the primary actor tries to establish itself as an obligatory passage point (OPP) between the other actors and the network, so that it becomes indispensable.
-
2. Interessement
Getting the actors interested and negotiating the terms of their involvement. The primary actor works to convince the other actors that the roles it has defined them are acceptable.
-
4. Mobilization of allies
Do the delegate actors in the network adequately represent the masses? If so, enrollment becomes active support.
-
Intermediaries are entities which make no difference (to some interesting state of affairs which we are studying) and so can be ignored. They transport the force of some other entity more or less without transformation and so are fairly uninteresting. Mediators are entities which multiply difference and so should be the object of study. Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs. From an ANT point of view sociology has tended to treat too much of the world as intermediaries.
-
For instance, a sociologist might take silk and nylon as intermediaries, holding that the former “means”, “reflects”, or “symbolises” the upper classes and the latter the lower classes. In such a view the real world silk-nylon difference is irrelevant — presumably many other material differences could also, and do also, transport this class distinction. But taken as mediators these fabrics would have to be engaged with by the analyst in their specificity: the internal real-world complexities of silk and nylon suddenly appear relevant, and are seen as actively constructing the ideological class distinction which they once merely reflected.
-
For the committed ANT analyst, social things — like class distinctions in taste in the silk and nylon example, but also groups, power, etc. — must constantly be constructed or performed anew through complex engagements with complex mediators.
-
ANT assumes that all the elements in a network, human and non-human, can and should be described in the same terms. This is called the principle of generalized symmetry. The rationale for this is that differences between them are generated in the network of relations, and should
-
nearly any actor can be considered merely a sum of other, smaller actors
-
In the automobile example above, a non-working engine would cause the driver to become aware of the car as a collection of parts rather than just a vehicle capable of transporting him or her from place to place
-
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends
-
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends to cease as well
-
automobile example above, a non-working engine would cause the driver to become aware of the car as a collection of parts rather than just a vehicle capable of transporting him or her from place to place . This can also occur when elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole. In his book Pandora’s Hope, Latour likens depunctualization to the opening of a black box. When closed, the box is perceived simply as a box, although when it is opened all elements inside it becomes visible.
-
In the above examples, “social order” and “functioning car” come into being through the successful interactions of their respective actor-networks, and actor-network theory refers to these creations as tokens or quasi-objects which are passed between actors within the network.
As the token is increasingly transmitted or passed through the network, it becomes increasingly punctualized and also increasingly reified. When the token is decreasingly transmitted, or when an actor fails to transmit the token (e.g., the oil pump breaks), punctualization and reification are decreased as
-
-
10 Mar 11
-
02 Dec 10
Michael CowenAlthough it is best known for its controversial insistence on the agency of nonhumans, ANT is also associated with forceful critiques of conventional and critical sociology.
-
01 Oct 10
john naccaratoActor-network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies. Although it is best known for its controversial insistence on the agency of nonhumans, ANT is also as
-
20 Sep 10
-
Actor-network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole (for example, a bank is both a network and an actor that hangs together, and for certain purposes acts as a single entity).
-
look at explicit strategies for relating different elements together into a network so that they form an apparently coherent whole.
-
actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making [1]. This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
networks of relations are not intrinsically coherent, and may indeed contain conflicts (there may be poor labor relations, or computer software may be incompatible).
-
-
-
23 May 10
Martin Lindnercan more technically be described as a “material–semiotic” method ... maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and “semiotic” (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and “semiotic”. ... the interactions
netzwerke _netzwerke actornetworktheory semiotik semiosphere delicious
-
21 May 10
julie reynoldspunctualisation
-
Punctualisation
If taken to its logical conclusion, nearly any actor can be considered merely a sum of other, smaller actors. An automobile is an example of a complex system. It contains many electronic and mechanical components, all of which are essentially hidden from view to the driver, who simply deals with the car as a single object. This effect is known as punctualisation, and is similar to the idea of abstraction in object-oriented programming.
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends to cease as well. In the automobile example above, a non-working engine would cause the driver to become aware of the car as a collection of parts rather than just a vehicle capable of transporting him or her from place to place. This can also occur when elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole. In his book Pandora’s Hope, Latour likens depunctualization to the opening of a black box. When closed, the box is perceived simply as a box, although when it is opened all elements inside it becomes visible.
-
In a workshop called “Actor Network and After”, Bruno Latour stated that there are four things wrong with actor-network theory: “actor”, “network”, “theory” and the hyphen. In a later book however (Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor–Network–Theory
-
-
28 Apr 10
-
05 Apr 10
Niklas Karlssonow material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole (for example, a bank is both a network and an actor that hangs together, and for certain purposes acts as a single entity). As a part of this it
-
09 Feb 10
-
Intermediaries are entities which make no difference
-
Mediators are entities which multiply difference
-
They transport the force of some other entity more or less without transformation
-
Their outputs cannot be predicted by their inputs.
-
ANT assumes that all the elements in a network, human and non-human, can and should be described in the same terms
-
-
18 Jan 10
-
28 Oct 09
-
22 Oct 09
-
-
Another criticism is that it suggests that all actors are equal within the network. It does not account for pre-existing structures, such as power, but instead sees these structures as emerging from the actions of actors within the network. Power emerges with the ability of an actor to align other actors to its interests. For this reason, ANT is sometimes seen as an attempt to re-introduce Whig history into science and technology studies; like the myth of the heroic inventor, ANT can be seen as an attempt to explain successful innovators by saying they were successful. In a similar vein ANT has been criticised as overly managerial in focus.
-
-
29 Sep 09
Dante-Gabryell Monsonit can more technically be described as a 'material-semiotic' method. This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and 'semiotic' (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and 'semiotic' (e
referencemaps processdimensions sociology philosophy wikipedia projects Networks theory socialnetworks organizations politics Semiotics protocol Systems Complexity granularity research Network for:mbauwens for:srose for:zellerdelicious
-
22 Aug 09
-
18 Aug 09
-
08 Jul 09
-
18 Jun 09
-
-
Actor-network theory tries to explain how material–semiotic networks come together to act as a whole (for example, a bank is both a network and an actor that hangs together, and for certain purposes acts as a single entity).
-
According to actor-network theory, such actor-networks are potentially transient, existing in a constant making and re-making [1]. This means that relations need to be repeatedly “performed” or the network will dissolve.
-
The approach is related to other versions of material-semiotics (and notably the work of philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Michel Foucault
-
It can also be seen as a way of being faithful to the insights of ethnomethodology. There are also obvious links to symbolic interactionist approaches such as the newer forms of grounded theory like situational analysis that seek to frame social circumstances as various forms of relationships associated with situations.
-
-
18 Dec 08
-
09 Dec 08
-
10 Nov 08
-
25 Sep 08
-
13 Sep 08
-
02 Aug 08
-
06 Jun 08
-
04 Jun 08
-
20 Dec 07
Phillip Longmaterial-semiotic methodology for studying innovation and science practices
-
20 Nov 07
-
08 Jul 07
-
Many of the characteristic ANT tools (including the notions of translation, generalized symmetry and the 'heterogeneous network'), together with a scientometric tool for mapping innovations in science and technology ('co-word analysis') were initially developed during the 1980s, predominantly in and around the CSI. The 'state of the art' of ANT in the late 1980s is well-described in Latour's 1987 text, Science in Action.[1]
-
From about 1990 onwards ANT started to become popular as a tool for analysis in a range of fields beyond STS. It was picked up and developed by authors in parts of organisational analysis, informatics, health studies, geography, sociology, anthropology, feminist studies and economics. Some such adoptions were relatively uncritical, but others were not, and the development of ANT through the 1990s reveals traces of its dialogues with related approaches, including especially feminist STS, geography, and anthropology.
-
Translation
Central to ANT (some times referred to as Sociology of Translation) is the concept of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending. In his widely debated 1986 study of how marine biologists try to restock the St Brieuc Bay in order to produce more scallops,[3] Michel Callon has defined 4 moments of translation. These four moments are derived from studying:
-
1. Problematisation
What is the problem that needs to be solved? Who are the relevant actors? Delegates need to be identified that will represent groups of actors. So, a union head represents workers or a Member of Parliament represents his constituency. During problematisation, the primary actor tries to establish itself as an obligatory passage point (OPP) between the other actors and the network, so that it becomes indispensable.
-
2. Interessement
Getting the actors interested and negotiating the terms of their involvement. The primary actor works to convince the other actors that the roles it has defined them are acceptable.
3. Enrolment
Actors accept the roles that have been defined for them during interessement
4. Mobilisation of allies
Do the delegate actors in the network adequately represent the masses? If so, enrolment becomes active support.
[edit]
-
Generalized Symmetry
ANT assumes that all the elements in a network, human and non-human, can and should be described in the same terms. This is called the principle of generalized symmetry. The rationale for this is that differences between them are generated in the network of relations, and should not be presupposed.
-
Actants
It talks, for instance, of Actants to denote human and non-human actors, and assumes that the actors in a network take the shape that they do by virtue of their relations with one another. It assumes that nothing lies outside the network of relations, and as noted above, suggests that there is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals, or other non-humans to act (and that there are only enacted alliances.) It further notes that as soon as an actor engages with an actor-network it too is caught up in the web of relations, and becomes part of the 'entelechy'.
-
Punctualisation
If taken to its logical conclusion, nearly any actor can be considered merely a sum of other, smaller actors. An automobile is an example of a complex system. It contains many electronic and mechanical components, all of which are essentially hidden from view to the driver, who simply deals with the car as a single object. This effect is known as punctualisation, and is similar to the idea of abstraction in object-oriented programming.
When an actor network breaks down, the punctualisation effect tends to cease as well. In the automobile example above, a non-working engine would cause the driver to become aware of the car as a collection of parts rather than just a vehicle capable of transporting him or her from place to place. This can also occur when elements of a network act contrarily to the network as a whole. In his 'Pandora's Hope' Latour likens depunctualization to the opening of Pandora's box.
[edit]
-
Tokens/quasi-objects
In the above examples, 'social order' and 'functioning car' come into being through the successful interactions of their respective actor-networks, and actor-network theory refers to these creations as tokens or quasi-objects which are passed between actors within the network.
As the token is increasingly transmitted or passed through the network, it becomes increasingly punctualized and also increasingly reified. When the token is decreasingly transmitted, or when an actor fails to transmit the token (e.g., the oil pump breaks), punctualization and reification are decreased as well.
-
-
25 Nov 06
-
Actor-network theory, often abbreviated as ANT, is a distinctive approach to social theory and research which originated in the field of science studies. Although it is best known for its controversial insistence on the agency of nonhumans, ANT is also associated with forceful critiques of conventional and critical sociology.
Developed by two leading French Science and Technology Studies (STS) scholars, Michel Callon and Bruno Latour, British sociologist John Law, and others, it can more technically be described as a 'material-semiotic' method. This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and 'semiotic' (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and 'semiotic' (for instance the interactions in a bank involve both people and their ideas, and computers. Together these form a single network).
-
Central to ANT is the concept of translation, in which innovators attempt to create a forum, a central network in which all the actors agree that the network is worth building and defending.
-
-
01 Oct 06
-
23 Apr 06
-
14 Apr 06
-
29 Jul 05
Nick GallYet Another Node/Network duality theory.
via_delicious_20101217 ImportedFurl20071006 StructureandAgency-Stigmergy ant pinboardimport20141106
-
The primary tenet of actor-network theory is the concept of the heterogenous network. That is, a network containing many dissimilar elements. These coextensive networks comprise of both social and technical parts. Moreover, the social and technical are treated as inseparable by ANT. When buying produce from a supermarket, for example, the actor-network involved would include the purchaser and the cashier, as well as the cash register, the money and the produce involved. It also includes other, less obvious objects, such as the clothes the purchaser wears, without which they would most likely not be served. The task of trying to identify all of the heterogeneous elements in an actor-network like this can be difficult, and is ultimately up to the discretion of the researcher. This is known as the problem of selection. Actor-network theory claims that any actor, whether person, object (including computer software, hardware, and technical standards), or organisation, is equally important to a social network. As such, societal order is an effect caused by the smooth running of an actor network. This order begins to break down when certain actors are removed. For example, the removal of telephones, banks or the president may all result in significant break-downs in social order.
-
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.