No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
(Google-)Knowing Economics
Abstract
How is economics made public? Specifically, how is economics made public on Google? Here we explore a methodological problem – studying google-knowing – and simultaneously explore the more pragmatic problem of the public-making of economics. We argue there has been very little attempt either to make economics public or to understand what is currently in the public sphere about economics. This is especially stark when compared to other knowledge contributors to society, like science. We start to remedy this gap by using a methodological figure: the google-knower. Google-knowing is central to how knowledge is created and circulated in society in the digital age and raises a range of questions at the heart of how we understand and make sense of our (economic) world. In this paper, we make common cause with google-knowers by searching on Google for economics. We find a picture of a discipline marked on the one hand by secrecy and gatekeeping and on the other by an insistence that it is not boring. We also argue that using the figure of the google-knower as a methodological tool offers insights into classic questions in epistemology, such as objectivity, knowledge as a commodity, a knowers' identity and expertise.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
This paper applies a virtue epistemology approach to using the Internet, as to improve our information-seeking behaviours. Virtue epistemology focusses on the cognitive character of agents and is less concerned with the
nature of truth and epistemic justification as compared to traditional analytic epistemology. Due to this focus on cognitive character and agency, it is a fruitful but underexplored approach to using the Internet in an epistemically desirable way. Thus, the central question in this paper is: How to use the Internet in an epistemically virtuous way? Using the work of Jason Baehr, it starts by outlining nine intellectual or epistemic virtues: curiosity, intellectual autonomy, intellectual humility, attentiveness, intellectual carefulness,
intellectual thoroughness, open-mindedness, intellectual courage and intellectual tenacity. It then explores how we should deploy these virtues and avoid the corresponding vices when interacting with the Internet,
particularly search engines. Whilst an epistemically virtuous use of the Internet will not guarantee that one will acquire true beliefs, understanding or even knowledge, it will strongly improve one’s information-seeking
behaviours. The paper ends with arguing that teaching and assessing online intellectual virtues should be part of school and university curricula, perhaps embedded in critical thinking courses, or even better, as individual units.
Science communication, as a field and as a practice, is fundamentally about knowledge distribution; it is about the access to, and the sharing of knowledge. All distribution (science communication included) brings with it issues of ethics and justice. Indeed, whether science communicators acknowledge it or not, they get to decide both which knowledge is shared (by choosing which topic is communicated), and who gets access to this knowledge (by choosing which audience it is presented to). As a result, the decisions of science communicators have important implications for epistemic justice: how knowledge is distributed fairly and equitably. This paper presents an overview of issues related to epistemic justice for science communication, and argues that there are two quite distinct ways in which science communicators can be just (or unjust) in the way they distribute knowledge. Both of these paths will be considered before concluding that, at least on one of these accounts, science communication as a field and as a practice is fundamentally epistemically unjust. Possible ways to redress this injustice are suggested.
Purpose
The aim of the study is to understand how meaning is assigned to online searching by viewing it as a mundane, yet often invisible, activity of everyday life and an integrated part of various social practices.
Design/methodology/approach
Searching is investigated with a sociomaterial approach with a starting point in information searching as entangled across practices and material arrangements and as a mundane part of everyday life. 21 focus groups with 127 participants have been carried out. The study focuses particularly on peoples’ experiences and meaning-making and on how these experiences and the making of meaning could be understood in the light of algorithmic shaping.
Findings
An often-invisible activity such as searching is made visible with the help of focus group discussions. An understanding of the relationship between searching and everyday life through two interrelated narratives is proposed: a search-ification of everyday life and a mundane-ification of search.
Originality/value
The study broadens the often narrow focus on searching in order to open up for a research-based discussion in information science on the role of online searching in society and everyday life.
This paper introduces a distinctive approach to methods development in digital social research called ‘interface methods’. We begin by discussing various methodological confluences between digital media, social studies of science and technology (STS) and sociology. Some authors have posited significant overlap between, on the one hand, sociological and STS concepts, and on the other hand, the ontologies of digital media. Others have emphasized the significant differences between prominent methods built into digital media and those of STS and sociology. This paper advocates a third approach, one that (a) highlights the dynamism and relative under-determinacy of digital methods, and (b) affirms that multiple methodological traditions intersect in digital devices and research. We argue that these two circumstances enable a distinctive approach to methodology in digital social research – thinking methods as ‘interface methods’ – and the paper contextualizes this approach in two different ways. First, we show how the proliferation of online data tools or ‘digital analytics’ opens up distinctive opportunities for critical and creative engagement with methods development at the intersection of sociology, STS and digital research. Second, we discuss a digital research project in which we investigated a specific ‘interface method’, namely co-occurrence analysis. In this digital pilot study we implemented this method in a critical and creative way to analyse and visualize ‘issue dynamics’ in the area of climate change on Twitter. We evaluate this project in the light of our principal objective, which was to test the possibilities for the modification of methods through experimental implementation and interfacing of various methodological traditions. To conclude, we discuss a major obstacle to the development of ‘interface methods’: digital media are marked by particular quantitative dynamics that seem adverse to some of the methodological commitments of sociology and STS. To address this, we argue in favour of a methodological approach in digital social research that affirms its maladjustment to the research methods that are prevalent in the medium.
Google Trends reveals that at the time we were writing our article on ‘The Coming Crisis of Empirical Sociology’ in 2007 almost nobody was searching the internet for ‘Big Data’. It was only towards the very end of 2010 that the term began to register, just ahead of an explosion of interest from 2011 onwards. In this commentary we take the opportunity to reflect back on the claims we made in that original paper in light of more recent discussions about the social scientific implications of the inundation of digital data. Did our paper, with its emphasis on the emergence of, what we termed, ‘social transactional data’ and ‘digital byproduct data’ prefigure contemporary debates that now form the basis and rationale for this excellent new journal? Or was the paper more concerned with broader methodological, theoretical and political debates that have somehow been lost in all of the loud babble that has come to surround Big Data. Using recent work on the BBC Great British Class Survey as an example this brief paper offers a reflexive and critical reflection on what has become – much to the surprise of its authors – one of the most cited papers in the discipline of sociology in the last decade.
YouTube has become one of the largest websites on the Internet. Among its many genres, both professional and amateur science communicators compete for audience attention. This article provides the first overview of science communication on YouTube and examines content factors that affect the popularity of science communication videos on the site. A content analysis of 390 videos from 39 YouTube channels was conducted. Although professionally generated content is superior in number, user-generated content was significantly more popular. Furthermore, videos that had consistent science communicators were more popular than those without a regular communicator. This study represents an important first step to understand content factors, which increases the channel and video popularity of science communication on YouTube.
© The Author(s) 2015.
With at least 150 million professional and amateur blogs on the Internet, blogging offers a potentially powerful tool for engaging large and diverse audiences with science. This article investigates science blogging practices to uncover key trends, including bloggers' self-perceptions of their role. Interviews with seven of the most popular science bloggers revealed them to be driven by intrinsic personal motivations. Wishing to pursue their love of writing and share their passion for science, they produce content suitable for niche audiences of science enthusiasts, although they do not assume background scientific knowledge. A content analysis of 1000 blog posts and comparison with the most popular blogs on the Internet further confirmed this result and additionally identified key factors that affect science blog popularity, including update frequency, topic diversity and the inclusion of non-text elements (especially images and video).
The transition from analogue to digital archives and the recent explosion of online content offers researchers novel ways of engaging with data. The crucial question for ensuring a balance between the supply and demand-side of data, is whether this trend connects to existing scholarly practices and to the average search skills of researchers. To gain insight into this process we conducted a survey among nearly three hundred (N= 288) humanities scholars in the Netherlands and Belgium with the aim of finding answers to the following questions: 1) To what extent are digital databases and archives used? 2) What are the preferences in search functionalities 3) Are there differences in search strategies between novices and experts of information retrieval? Our results show that while scholars actively engage in research online they mainly search for text and images. General search systems such as Google and JSTOR are predominant, while large-scale collections such as Europeana are rarely consulted. Searching with keywords is the dominant search strategy and advanced search options are rarely used. When comparing novice and more experienced searchers, the first tend to have a more narrow selection of search engines, and mostly use keywords. Our overall findings indicate that Google is the key player among available search engines. This dominant use illustrates the paradoxical attitude of scholars toward Google: while provenance and context are deemed key academic requirements, the workings of the Google algorithm remain unclear. We conclude that Google introduces a black box into digital scholarly practices, indicating scholars will become increasingly dependent on such black boxed algorithms. This calls for a reconsideration of the academic principles of provenance and context.
The aim of the article is to intervene in debates about the digital and, in particular, framings that imagine the digital in terms of epochal shifts or as redefining life. Instead, drawing on recent developments in digital methods, we explore the lively, productive and performative qualities of the digital by attending to the specificities of digital devices and how they interact, and sometimes compete, with older devices and their capacity to mobilize and materialize social and other relations. In doing so, our aim is to explore the implications of digital devices and data for reassembling social science methods or what we call the social science apparatuses that assemble digital devices and data to ‘know’ the social and other relations. Building on recent work at CRESC on the social life of methods, we recommend a genealogical approach that is alive to the ways in which digital devices are simultaneously shaped by social worlds, and can in turn become agents that shape those worlds. This calls for attending to the specificities of digital devices themselves, how they are varied and composed of diverse socio-technical arrangements, and are enrolled in the creation of new knowledge spaces, institutions and actors. Rather than exploring what large-scale changes can be revealed and understood through the digital, we argue for explorations of how digital devices themselves are materially implicated in the production and performance of contemporary sociality. To that end we offer the following nine propositions about the implications of digital data and devices and argue that these demand rethinking the theoretical assumptions of social science methods: transactional actors; heterogeneity; visualization; continuous time; whole populations; granularity; expertise; mobile and mobilizing; and non-coherence.
From May to June 2011, during a survey of the wheat-growing areas in Meknes in the Saïs Region of Morocco, several cyst nematode populations were detected. Sampling was performed 1 month before wheat (Triticum durum) harvest, in fields showing patches of stunted plants. Plants were growing poorly, had chlorotic lower leaves, and a reduced numbers of ears. Root systems were short and had a bushy appearance because of increased secondary root production. No cysts were visible on the roots, but were found in the soil. Cysts were collected from soil on 200-µm sieves by the modified Cobb decanting and sieving method (1) and identified by morphology and internal transcribed spacer (ITS)-rDNA sequencing. All isolates were identified as Heterodera avenae except the isolate from Aïn Jemâa. From the latter, key morphological features from cysts and second-stage juveniles (J2) were determined. The cysts (n = 10) had the following characteristics: bifenestrate vulval cone, body length without neck 590 µm (551 to 632 µm), body width 393 µm (310 to 490 µm), neck length 75 µm (65 to 90 µm), fenestra length 64 µm (60 to 72 µm) and width 21 µm (18 to 25 µm), underbridge length 96 µm (85 to 115 µm), vulval slit length 8 µm (7 to 9 µm), vulva bridge width 27 µm (24 to 33 µm), and bullae absent. The J2s (n = 10) had the following characteristics: body length 445 µm (412 to 472 µm), body width 19 µm (19 to 21 µm), stylet length 24 µm (23 to 25 µm), four lateral lines, tail length 50 µm (46 to 54 µm), and hyaline terminal tail 28 µm (24 to 31 µm). Values of the morphological characters were within the range of H. latipons reported by Handoo (3). The bifenestrate cysts with a strong underbridge and no bullae and J2 with a tail length greater than 40 µm, a stylet longer than 15 µm, and four incisures in the lateral field were typical for H. latipons. To confirm the identification, molecular observations were made. DNA was extracted from three juveniles from three different cysts separately (4). The ITS-rDNA region was amplified using the primers 5′-CGT AAC AAG GTA GCT GTA G-3′ and 5′-TCC TCC GCT AAA TGA TAT G-3′ as described by Ferris et al. (2). This resulted in a 1,040-bp DNA fragment. The PCR-products were purified and sequenced (Macrogen, Inc., Seoul, Korea). All sequences obtained (GenBank Accession Nos. per cyst: JQ319035, JQ319036, and JQ319037) were compared with sequences available from the GenBank database (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), including several species of Heterodera. This comparison revealed a sequence similarity of 97 to 99% with H. latipons and 89% or lower with any other species of Heterodera. Morphological and molecular identification demonstrated that the population of cyst nematodes from a wheat field in Aïn Jemâa, Morocco was H. latipons. In the patches with poor growing plants, 65 cysts per 100 cm 3 soil were found. To our knowledge, this detection represents a new record of H. latipons. Since the nematode can cause considerable damage to wheat, one of the main cereals produced in Morocco, care should be taken to prevent the spread to other regions.
Blogs are reshaping our political, social, and cultural environment. Education is affected by blogs because of their potential for learning and teaching, and also their risks. This article elaborates a set of rules for evaluating and implementing blogs in teaching college science. (Contains 5 figures.)
This article investigates how the new spirit of capitalism gets inscribed in the fabric of search algorithms by way of social practices. Drawing on the tradition of the social construction of technology (SCOT) and 17 qualitative expert interviews it discusses how search engines and their revenue models are negotiated and stabilized in a network of actors and interests, website providers and users first and foremost. It further shows how corporate search engines and their capitalist ideology are solidified in a socio-political context characterized by a techno-euphoric climate of innovation and a politics of privatization. This analysis provides a valuable contribution to contemporary search engine critique mainly focusing on search engines' business models and societal implications. It shows that a shift of perspective is needed from impacts search engines have on society towards social practices and power relations involved in the construction of search engines to renegotiate search engines and their algorithmic ideology in the future.
Music videos are about many topics, and some are about science and technology. In this commentary, the author explores what kinds of music videos about science are available and how they could be categorized. It is argued that music videos could be helpful tools for science communication and science education. However, people who reject scientific information and results are also using music videos to publicize their views. Research on the subject is still very sparse. The science communication community needs a better understanding of the practices of online video sharing and the effects of music videos about science.
An eye tracking experiment revealed that college student users have substantial trust in Google’s ability to rank results by their true relevance to the query. When the participants selected a link to follow from Google’s result pages, their decisions were strongly biased towards links higher in position even if the abstracts themselves were less relevant. While the participants reacted to artificially reduced retrieval quality by greater scrutiny, they failed to achieve the same success rate. This demonstrated trust in Google has implications for the search engine’s tremendous potential influence on culture, society, and user traffic on the Web.
Events such as the 2017 “March for Science” have brought greater attention to public attitudes toward science and scientists. Our analyses of recent poll data show that Americans’ confidence in scientists has been high for roughly 40 years (relative to other institutions), and that it is high even for controversial topics such as global warming and nuclear energy. International comparisons show broad similarities with individuals in Germany and the UK, including that trust in scientists can fluctuate depending on who employs them and what topic is under discussion. Finally, more granular analyses in the United States reveal large divides in trust based on geographic location and religious identification (i.e., rural residents exhibit comparatively low trust and the nonreligious comparatively high trust), while the gap between political partisans has been relatively small but has spiked in recent years.
Introduction: Students increasingly depend on Web search for educational purposes. This causes concerns among education providers as some evidence indicates that in higher education, the disadvantages of Web search and personalised information are not justified by the benefits. Method: One hundred and twenty university students were surveyed about their information-seeking behaviour for educational purposes. We also examined students’ information access while using Web search, through twenty-eight one-on-one study sessions. Analysis: Survey participants ranked their preference towards different information resources on a 5-point Likert scale. Given equal exposure to the first five standard pages of the search results during the study sessions, students’ explicit and implicit feedback was used to evaluate the relevance of the search results. Results: First, most participating students declared that they use Google search engine as their primary or only information-seeking tool. Second, about 60% of the clicked result links during the study sessions were located in pages 2+ of the search results without personalisation influencing the relevance of the top-ranked search results. In real-life scenarios pages 2+ of the search results receive only ~10% of the clicks. Students also expressed more satisfaction with the relevance of non-personalised over personalised search results. These differences presented a missed information opportunity, an opportunity bias, for students.
This paper analyzes Google’s political economy. In section 2, Google’s cycle of capital accumulation is explained and the role of surveillance in Google’s form of capital accumulation is explained. In section 3, the discussion if Google is “evil” is taken up. Based on Dallas Smythe’s concept of the audience commodity, the role of the notion of Internet prosumer commodification is stressed.
Across the world both journalists and their audiences now depend on social media and search engines to deliver them news and information. Standing between the individual and the ever-growing volumes of digital data are a variety of automated gatekeepers—algorithms—whose great and growing power to influence journalism is only starting to be recognised. This unaccountable software—generally under the control of large intermediaries like Facebook, Apple and Google—is already influencing the ways in which journalists prioritise potential stories, how they research them, and how these stories are published and consumed. This chapter draws on Feenberg’s critical theories of technology (Questioning Technology, Routledge, London, 1999) to explore this phenomenon and describe some possible consequences for the provision and consumption of knowledge to the public sphere.
Science is often touted as the solution to our biggest problems; economics underlies most government and social policy. So which discipline does the public at large consider as being most important in solving our biggest challenges: Science or economics? We report on a survey asking the American public how they perceive the relative importance of science and economics in dealing with five societal challenges. How 'key' are science and economics considered for climate change, environmental protection, natural resources, health, and food security? We analyse the relative importance of science and economics across demographics and discuss possible interpretations of the results.
This article is an intervention in the debate on big data. It seeks to show, first, that behind the wager to make sociology more relevant to the digital there lies a coherent if essentially unstated vision and a whole stance which are more a symptom of the current world than a resolute endeavour to think that world through; hence the conclusion that the perspective prevailing in the debate lacks both the theoretical grip and the practical impulse to initiate a much needed renewal of social theory and sociology. Second, and more importantly, the article expounds an alternative view and shows by thus doing that other possibilities of engaging the digital can be pursued. The article is therefore an invitation to widen the debate on big data and the digital and a call for a more combative social theory.
The aim of this study is to show how Google’s business model is concealed within Google Apps for Education (GAFE) as well as how such a bundle is perceived within one educational organisation, consisting of approximately 30 schools. The study consists of two parts: 1) a rhetorical analysis of Google policy documents and 2) an interview study in a Swedish educational organisation. By making an implicit demarcation between the two concepts (your) ‘data’ and (collected) ‘information’ Google can disguise the presence of a business model for online marketing and, at the same time, simulate the practices and ethics of a free public service institution. This makes it problematic for Swedish schools to implement Google Apps for Education, bearing in mind Google’s surveillance practices for making profits on pupil’s algorithmic identities. From a front end viewpoint of Google Apps for Education, the advantages of the services are evident to the users, and emerge in the study, whereas back end strategies are relatively hidden.
Information providing and gathering increasingly involve technologies like search engines, which actively shape their epistemic surroundings. Yet, a satisfying account of the epistemic responsibilities associated with them does not exist. We analyze automatically generated search suggestions from the perspective of social epistemology to illustrate how epistemic responsibilities associated with a technology can be derived and assigned. Drawing on our previously developed theoretical framework that connects responsible epistemic behavior to practicability, we address two questions: first, given the different technological possibilities available to searchers, the search technology, and search providers, who should bear which responsibilities? Second, given the technology’s epistemically relevant features and potential harms, how should search terms be autocompleted? Our analysis reveals that epistemic responsibility lies mostly with search providers, which should eliminate three categories of autosuggestions: those that result from organized attacks, those that perpetuate damaging stereotypes, and those that associate negative characteristics with specific individuals.
First historical account of the development of social science research methods in Britain
Accessibly and engagingly written
Sheds new light on the huge social changes experienced in Britain over the last 70 years
Identities and Social Change in Britain since 1940 examines how, between 1940 and 1970 British society was marked by the imprint of the academic social sciences in profound ways which have an enduring legacy on how we see ourselves. It focuses on how interview methods and sample surveys eclipsed literature and the community study as a means of understanding ordinary life. The book shows that these methods were part of a wider remaking of British national identity in the aftermath of decolonisation in which measures of the rational, managed nation eclipsed literary and romantic ones. It also links the emergence of social science methods to the strengthening of technocratic and scientific identities amongst the educated middle classes, and to the rise in masculine authority which challenged feminine expertise.
This book is the first to draw extensively on archived qualitative social science data from the 1930s to the 1960s, which it uses to offer a unique, personal and challenging account of post war social change in Britain. It also uses this data to conduct a new kind of historical sociology of the social sciences, one that emphasises the discontinuities in knowledge forms and which stresses how disciplines and institutions competed with each other for reputation. Its emphasis on how social scientific forms of knowing eclipsed those from the arts and humanities during this period offers a radical re-thinking of the role of expertise today which will provoke social scientists, scholars in the humanities, and the general reader alike.
We compare answers to policy questions by economic experts and a representative sample of the US population. We find a 35 percentage point difference between the two groups. This gap is only partially explained by differences in ideological or personal characteristics of the two samples. Interestingly, the difference is the largest on the questions where economists agree the most and where there is the largest amount of literature. Informing people of the expert opinions does not seem to have much of an impact. Ordinary people seem to be skeptical of the implicit assumptions embedded into the economists' answers.
In this essay, we analyze the dominant position of economics within the network of the social sciences in the United States. We begin by documenting the relative insularity of economics, using bibliometric data. Next we analyze the tight management of the field from the top down, which gives economics its characteristic hierarchical structure. Economists also distinguish themselves from other social scientists through their much better material situation (many teach in business schools, have external consulting activities), their more individualist worldviews, and their confidence in their discipline's ability to fix the world's problems. Taken together, these traits constitute what we call the superiority of economists, where economists' objective supremacy is intimately linked with their subjective sense of authority and entitlement. While this superiority has certainly fueled economists' practical involvement and their considerable influence over the economy, it has also exposed them more to conflicts of interests, political critique, even derision.
Science reporting in the media often involves contested issues, such as, for example, biotechnology, climate change, and, more recently, geoengineering. The reporter’s framing of the issue is likely to influence readers’ perception of it. The notion of framing is related to how individuals and groups perceive and communicate about the world. Framing is typically studied by means of content analysis, focusing primarily on the “stories” told about the issue. The current article, on the other hand, springs from an interest in writer behavior. I wish to investigate how news writers strategically exploit their rhetorical competence when reporting on contested issues, and I argue that text linguistics represents a fruitful approach to studying this process. It is suggested that genre features may serve as a basis for identifying key framing locations in the text, and that the notion of evaluation plays an important part in writers’ framing activity. I discuss these aspects through a case study involving six news reports on a geoengineering experiment.
This paper contributes to debates about the implications of digital technology for social research by proposing the concept of the redistribution of methods. In the context of digitization, I argue, social research becomes noticeably a distributed accomplishment: online platforms, users, devices and informational practices actively contribute to the performance of digital social research. This also applies more specifically to social research methods, and this paper explores the phenomenon in relation to two specific digital methods, online network and textual analysis, arguing that sociological research stands much to gain from engaging with their distribution, both normatively and analytically speaking. I distinguish four predominant views on the redistribution of digital social methods: methods-as-usual, big methods, virtual methods and digital methods. Taking up this last notion, I propose that a redistributive understanding of social research opens up a new approach to the re-mediation of social methods in digital environments. I develop this argument through a discussion of two particular online research platforms: the Issue Crawler, a web-based platform for hyperlink analysis, and the Co-Word Machine, an online tool of textual analysis currently under development. Both these tools re-mediate existing social methods, and both, I argue, involve the attempt to render specific methodology critiques effective in the online realm, namely critiques of the authority effects implicit in citation analysis. As such, these methods offer ways for social research to intervene critically in digital social research, and more specifically, to endorse and actively pursue the re-distribution of social methods online.
This article develops a social epistemological analysis of Web-based search engines, addressing the following questions. First, what epistemic functions do search engines perform? Second, what dimensions of assessment are appropriate for the epistemic evaluation of search engines? Third, how well do current search engines perform on these? The article explains why they fulfil the role of a surrogate expert, and proposes three ways of assessing their utility as an epistemic tool—timeliness, authority prioritisation, and objectivity. “Personalisation” is a current trend in Internet-delivered services, and consists in tailoring online content to the interests of the individual user. It is argued here that personalisation threatens the objectivity of search results. Objectivity is a public good; so there is a prima facie case for government regulation of search engines.
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to examine the ethical implications of Google's Knowledge Graph. The paper argues that in the advent and implementation of said Knowledge Graph, the role of Google in users' lives and the power held by Google as the key intermediary of information must be scrutinized.
Design/methodology/approach
– Revisiting existing literature on Google and its impact on knowledge culture, the paper seeks to assess whether the implementation of The Knowledge Graph represents a significant shift in the nature (or use) of the service.
Findings
– The paper concludes that the extension to Google Search, The Knowledge Graph, can serve to radicalize Google's position as a key intermediary of information in users' lives. Rather than simply serving as a gatekeeper supplying the user with an array of links matching a given query, Google now conveniently disseminates information on their own site, roughly rendering the remainder of the web superfluous. Considering both the commercial nature and the opacity of the service, Google as a de facto solo editor of information is worrying from both a democratic and ethical perspective. A culture of emphatic insistence on convenience and consumption is likely to contribute to the impediment of autonomous information retrieval and digital literacy.
Research limitations/implications
– The paper must be considered a preliminary inquiry into Google's reliability as an editor of the body of knowledge. As of yet, no literature specifically has remarked on The Knowledge Graph.
Originality/value
– This paper examines whether the newest extension of Google Search, The Knowledge Graph, poses any significant changes to the assessment of the service and its role in the culture. Fostering critical, digital literacy in search engine users is deemed of even more vital importance to society with the implementation of The Knowledge Graph. This paper, preliminary and far from exhaustive, seeks to initiate a discussion on the future responsibilities of Google, scholars and users in securing the ideal of critical digital literacy.
People increasingly form beliefs based on information gained from automatically filtered internet sources such as search engines. However, the workings of such sources are often opaque, preventing subjects from knowing whether the information provided is biased or incomplete. Users' reliance on internet technologies whose modes of operation are concealed from them raises serious concerns about the justificatory status of the beliefs they end up forming. Yet it is unclear how to address these concerns within standard theories of knowledge and justification. To shed light on the problem, we introduce a novel conceptual framework that clarifies the relations between justified belief, epistemic responsibility, action and the technological resources available to a subject. We argue that justified belief is subject to certain epistemic responsibilities that accompany the subject's particular decision-taking circumstances, and that one typical responsibility is to ascertain, so far as one can, whether the information upon which the judgment will rest is biased or incomplete. What this responsibility comprises is partly determined by the inquiry-enabling technologies available to the subject. We argue that a subject's beliefs that are formed based on internet-filtered information are less justified than they would be if she either knew how filtering worked or relied on additional sources, and that the subject may have the epistemic responsibility to take measures to enhance the justificatory status of such beliefs.
New media are having a significant impact on science communication, both on the way scientists communicate with peers and on the dissemination of science to the lay public. Science blogs, in particular, provide an open space for science communication, where a diverse audience (with different degrees of expertise) may have access to science information intended both for nonspecialist readers and for experts. The purpose of this article is to analyze the strategies used by bloggers to communicate and recontextualize scientific discourse in the realm of science blogs. These strategies involve adjusting information to the readers’ knowledge and information needs, deploying linguistic features typical of personal, informal, and dialogic interaction to create intimacy and proximity, engaging in critical analysis of the recontextualized research and focusing on its relevance, and using explicit and personal expressions of evaluation. The article shows that, given the diverse audience of science posts, bloggers display a blending of discursive practices from different discourses and harness the affordances of new media to achieve their rhetorical purposes.
'This is an ambitious, original, and complex treatment of key aspects of contemporary capitalism. It makes a major contribution because it profoundly destabilizes the scholarship on globalization, the so-called new economy, information technology, distinct contemporary business cultures and practices' - Saskia Sassen, author of Globalization and its Discontents 'Nigel Thrift offers us the sort of cultural analysis of global capitalism that has long been needed - one that emphasizes the innovative energy of global capitalism. The book avoids stale denouncements and offers instead a view of capitalism as a form of practice' - Karin Knorr Cetina, Professor of Sociology, University of Konstanz, GermanyCapitalism is well known for producing a form of existence where 'everything solid melts into air'. But what happens when capitalism develops theories about itself? Are we moving into a condition in which capitalism can be said to possess a brain?These questions are pursued in this sparkling and thought-provoking book. Thrift looks at what he calls "the cultural circuit of capitalism," the mechanism for generating new theories of capitalism. The book traces the rise of this circuit back to the 1960s when a series of institutions locked together to interrogate capitalism, to the present day, when these institutions are moving out to the Pacific basin and beyond. What have these theories produced? How have they been implicated in the speculative bubbles that characterized the late twentieth century? What part have they played in developing our understanding of human relations?Building on an inter-disciplinary approach which embraces the core social sciences, Thrift outlines an exciting new theory for understanding capitalism. His book is of interest to readers in Geography, Social Theory, Antrhopology and Cultural Economics.
I. The Problematic: The domain of testimony What is testimony? Objections and clarifications II. The Tradition: Testimony, observation, and the reductive approach Deciding for testimony The analogical approach Scottish fundamentalism III. The Solution: The status of testimony Language and mind IV: The Puzzles: Astonishing reports The disappearance of history Dretske's drinker V. The Applications: Collingwood and historical testimony Mathematical knowledge and reliable authority Psychology and the law Experts and the law
Analytical table of contents Preface Introduction: rationality Part I. Representing: 1. What is scientific realism? 2. Building and causing 3. Positivism 4. Pragmatism 5. Incommensurability 6. Reference 7. Internal realism 8. A surrogate for truth Part II. Intervening: 9. Experiment 10. Observation 11. Microscopes 12. Speculation, calculation, models, approximations 13. The creation of phenomena 14. Measurement 15. Baconian topics 16. Experimentation and scientific realism Further reading Index.
This study examines the affordances that journalistic science blogging offers at the boundaries between science communicators, researchers, non-scientists, and other readers. Taking a framework of boundary phenomena, it examines, as a case study, the blog Not Exactly Rocket Science and in particular two posts that spawned a collaboration between a scientist and a farmer. Two existing boundary phenomena, boundary objects and boundary organizations, are examined as possible models for understanding the interactions facilitated by this science blog. These existing phenomena are argued to not adequately account for and describe the interactions between people and information facilitated by the case study posts. To better understand science blogging boundaries, a new category of boundary phenomenon – the boundary layer – is proposed.
Research has already highlighted the strained relationships between scientists and journalists. Scientists generally criticize journalists for being over-simplistic, while journalists criticize researchers for being non-communicative. However, with the advent of Web 2.0, some researchers became more communicative by creating their own blogs.
This article explores the various channels used for the dissemination of science news and how journalists and scientists who blog see each other. First, the study interviews science journalists in Belgium and France, to examine the criteria that they use to evaluate the credibility of science blogs. Second, interviews conducted with science bloggers reveal the reasons that prompted them to create a blog, and, if applicable, why they have become disillusioned with science journalism.
This article discusses the online relationships between science journalists and science bloggers. The findings of this study show that science journalists do not generally see science blogs as valuable sources of information. At the same time, it confirms that some scientists use their blogs to circumvent traditional media.
A better understanding is needed about how the online environment affects the communication of science information to the public.
Abstract This paper presents the results of a recently conducted survey of 1500 professional economists living in the United States and Canada. The study was undertaken in an attempt to ascertain professional economists’views of the worth and usefulness of their own scientific research. The response rate of the survey was 49 percent (734 respondents) yielding statistical results which suggest that economists do believe their research has some social value. Economists in this survey believe, however, that the spillover benefits from that research are not substantial and are probably limited to certain groups.