Social informatics - Revision history

Shawndouglas: Updated content.

2014-05-01T16:07:53Z

Updated content.

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 1 May 2014
Line 2:		Line 2:

	==Research==		==Research==
	~~Historically,~~ social informatics research ~~has been strong~~ in ~~the Scandinavian countries~~, the UK and ~~Northern Europe (Williams & Edge~~, ~~1996~~, ~~section 1; [~~http://www.~~inform~~.nu/~~Articles~~/~~Vol3~~/~~v3n2p89~~-~~96r~~.pdf ~~Sawyer & Rosenbaum~~, 2000~~, p. 93]). Within North America, the field is represented largely through independent research efforts at a number of diverse institutions ([~~http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf ~~Saywer &~~ Rosenbaum, ~~p. 93]).~~		Research in social informatics can be categorized into three orientations: normative, analytical, and critical. Normative research focuses on the development of theories based on empirical analysis that may be used to develop organizational policies and work practices. The heart of such analyses lies in socio-technical interaction networks, a framework built around the idea that humans and the technologies they build are "co-constitutive," bound together, and that any examination of one must necessarily consider the other. Studies of the analytical orientation develop theory or define methodologies to contribute to theorizing in institutional settings. Critical analysis examines technological solutions from non-traditional perspectives in order to influence design and implementation.<ref name="KlingLearning">{{cite journal \|url=http://www.indiana.edu/~tisj/readers/full-text/16-3%20kling.pdf \|journal=The Information Society \|title=Learning About Information Technologies and Social Change: The Contribution of Social Informatics \|author=Kling, Rob \|volume=16 \|issue=3 \|pages=217–232 \|year=2000 \|accessdate=01 May 2014}}</ref><ref name="SawyerSI">{{cite journal \|url=http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf \|format=PDF \|journal=Informing Science \|title=Social Informatics in the Information Sciences: Current Activities and Emerging Directions \|author=Sawyer, Steve; Rosenbaum, Howard \|volume=3 \|issue=2 \|pages=89–95 \|year=2000 \|accessdate=01 May 2014}}</ref>

	Social informatics research ~~diverges from earlier~~, ~~deterministic (both social and technological) models for measuring~~ the ~~social impacts of technology. Such technological deterministic models characterized~~ information ~~technologies as~~ tools ~~to be installed and used with a pre-determined set of impacts on society dictated by the technology’s stated capabilities~~ (~~Williams & Edge, 1996~~). ~~Similarly,~~ the ~~socially deterministic theory represented by some proponents~~ of the social ~~construction of technology (SCOT)~~ or ~~social shaping of technology theory as advocated by Williams & Edge (1996) see technology as~~ the ~~product~~ of human social forces. In contrast, some social informatics methodologies consider the context surrounding technology and the material properties of the technology to be equally important: the people who will interact with a system, the organizational policies governing work practice, and support resources. This contextual inquiry produces “nuanced conceptual understanding” of systems that can be used to examine issues like access to technology, electronic forms of communication, and large-scale networks (Kling, 2000).		==History==
			Social informatics research focused primarily on organizations in the 1970s and 1980s, as they were the ones most likey to have information and communication tools (ICT). At this point researchers were asking questions like<ref name="KlingLearning" />:
			* "What would be the impact of computers on organizational behavior if we did X?"
			* "What would be the changes in social life if we did X?"
			* "Will computer systems improve or degrade the quality of work?"
			* "To what extent did organizations become centralized after computerization?"

	~~Research in social informatics can be categorized into three orientations (Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90). Normative research focuses on~~ the development of theories based on [[empirical]] analysis that may be used to develop organizational policies and work practices (Kling, 2000, p. 228). The heart of such analyses lies in socio-technical interaction networks (Kling, 2000, p. 219), ~~a framework built around~~ the ~~idea that humans and the technologies they build are “co-constitutive”~~, ~~bound together, and that any examination of one must necessarily consider the~~ other. Studies of the analytical orientation develop theory or define methodologies to contribute to theorizing in institutional settings (Kling, 2000, p. 229, note 1). Critical analysis, like Lucy Suchman’s examination of articulation work (1994), examine technological solutions from non-traditional perspectives in order to influence design and implementation (Kling, 200, p. 229, note 1; Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90).		During the 1990s, with the Internet age upon people, researchers began asking other questions:

	~~==Future==~~		* Will the Internet provide even higher quality information than before to the public?
	~~Social informatics is a young intellectual movement and its future is still being defined. However, because SST theorists such as Williams and Edge suggest that~~ the amorphous boundaries between humans and technology that emerge in social shaping technology research indicate that technology is not a distinct social endeavor worthy of individual study (1996, section 6, para. 5), indicating that there is a need for social informatics research that bridges the ~~gap between technological and social determinism. This observation, coupled with the many fields that contribute research, suggest a future in which social informatics theories~~ and ~~concepts settle to form a substrate, an “indispensable analytical foundation” (Kling, 2000, p. 229) for work in other disciplines.~~		* Will Internet-based higher education courses eventually replace physical classes at universities and colleges?

	~~==Social Informatics in education==~~		During this time several important truths were found about the field of study. First, contradictory outcomes may evolve out of two or more similar but separate ICT implementations and usages. These differences can be accounted for "by emphasizing the importance of the social and organizational contexts and their effects on ICT implementation and use.<ref name="SawyerSI" /> Second, ICT design, implementation, and use occurs within and is affected by a complex mesh of non-technical social contexts, decisions, and practices.<ref name="SawyerSI" /> Finally, designers, administrators, and deployers of ICTs can all benefit the end user and the social contexts surrounding the ICTs by applying social informatics analysis before or during the design, deployment, and usage of those ICTs.<ref name="KlingLearning" />
	~~Social Informatics is also~~ about ~~teaching social issues~~ of ~~computing to Computer Science students (Kling & Jewet~~,~~1996)~~. ~~Depending~~ on ~~educational traditions~~, ~~social informatics~~ is ~~scattered in the curriculum~~ of ~~different disciplines~~, ~~as well as in Computer Science~~, ~~Information Science~~, ~~[[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]] (Europe)~~ and ~~Web Sociology (Kling, 1999). In some instances there might be a lack~~ of ~~understanding of why teaching~~ social ~~issues of computing is important~~, ~~both by individual lecturers~~ and ~~students~~, ~~resulting~~ in ~~a view that~~ Social Informatics ~~is boring~~ and ~~without importance (Godejord, 2007)~~. ~~Some researchers have pointed out that~~ in ~~order to create awareness of~~ the ~~importance~~ of social issues of ~~computing~~, ~~one has to focus on didactics of~~ Social Informatics ~~(Godejord~~, ~~2007).~~
			Today, social informatics continues to expand in scope as technology adoption and information consumption expands. The 2014 International Conference on Social Informatics, for example, will attempt "to bridge the gap between the social sciences and computer science ... by putting emphasis on the methodology needed in the field of computational social science to reach long-term research objectives."<ref name="SocInfo14">{{cite web \|url=http://socinfo2014.org/ \|title=Welcome to SocInfo 2014 \|publisher=SocInfo 2014 \|accessdate=01 May 2014}}</ref> Other topics suggested for future development by social informatics researchers include "[i]ntegrated development issues of electronic information resources and their effective use in different spheres of society" and "[e]xploring new opportunities for human development in the Information Society, including intellectual, creative, and moral qualities."<ref name="KolinSIToday">{{cite journal \|url=http://www.triple-c.at/index.php/tripleC/article/download/299/285 \|format=PDF \|journal=tripleC \|title=Social Informatics Today and Tomorrow: Status, Problems and Prospects of Development of Complex Lines in the Field of Science and Education \|author=Kolin, Konstantin \|volume=9 \|issue=2 \|pages=460–465 \|year=2011 \|accessdate=01 May 2014}}</ref>

	==See also==		==See also==
	*[[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]]		*[[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]]

	~~==External links==~~
	*[http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics], Indiana University, USA
	*[http://www.social-informatics.org/ Social Informatics.org], University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
	*[http://samfinfo.pbwiki.com/ Social Informatics Resources], Nesna University College, Norway
	*[http://www.informatics.sun.ac.za/SI/ Centre for Knowledge Dynamics and Decision Making], University of Stellenbosch, South Africa

	==Notes==		==Notes==
			This article reuses a few elements from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_informatics the Wikipedia article].
	This article ~~heavily~~ reuses ~~content~~ from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_informatics the Wikipedia article].

	==References==		==References==
	<references />		<references />
	* "Demistifying the Digital Divide: The simple binary notion of technology haves and have-nots doesn't quite compute", an article by Mark Warschauer on page forty-two of the August, 2003 issue of ''Scientific American''

	* Center for Social Informatics – SLIS – Indiana University – Mission (n.d). Retrieved October 18, 2004 from http://www.slis.indiana.edu/CSI/mission.html

	* Kim, Jong-Young. [http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Mar-00/kim.html Social Interaction in Computer-Mediated Communication], ''ASIS Bulletin'' Feb/Mar 2000 <!--accessed October 26, 2008-->

	* Kling, R. (2000). Learning about information technologies and social change: The contribution of social informatics. The Information Society, 16(3), 217-232.

	* Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H., & Sawyer, S. (2005). Understanding and Communicating Social Informatics: A Framework for Studying and Teaching the Human Contexts of Information and Communications Technologies. Medford, New Jersey: Information Today, Inc.

	* Sawyer, S. and Rosenbaum, H. (2000). Social informatics in the information sciences: Current activities and emerging directions. [Electronic Version] Informing Science. 3 (2), 89-95 available at http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf

	* Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 11(Nov), 1492-1512.

	* Suchman, L. (1994). Supporting articulation work: Aspects of a feminist practice of office technology production. In R. Kling (Ed.), Computerization and Controversy (pp. 407-423). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

	* Williams, R., & Edge, D. (1996). The social shaping of technology. Research Policy, 25, 865-899. Retrieved September 1, 2004 from http://www.rcss.ed.ac.uk/technology/SSTRPfull.doc

	* Culnan, M. J., & Markus, M. L.. (1987). Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam. K. H. Roberts, & L. W. porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 420-443). newbury Park, CA: Sage.

	* Godejord, P.A. (2007). Fighting child pornography: Exploring didactics and student engagement in social informatics, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Volume 58, Issue 3

	[[Category:Informatics]]		[[Category:Informatics]]

Shawndouglas: Updated intro.

2014-04-27T18:52:16Z

Updated intro.

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:52, 27 April 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Social informatics''' is the study of [[information]] and communication tools in cultural, or institutional contexts ~~(Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, 2005)~~. Another definition is the interdisciplinary study of the design, uses and consequences of information technologies that takes into account their interaction with institutional and cultural contexts (Kling, "~~What is Social Informatics and Why Does it Matter?~~"~~). A transdisciplinary field, ([~~http://~~www~~.~~inform~~.nu/~~Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer~~ & ~~Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90]) social informatics is part of a larger body of socio-economic research that examines the ways in which the technological artifact~~ and ~~human social context mutually constitute the information~~ and ~~communications technology (ICT) ensemble. Some proponents of social informatics use~~ the ~~relationship~~ of ~~a biological community to its environment as an analogy for the relationship of tools to people who use them. The [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Center for Social Informatics] founded by the late Dr.~~ Rob ~~Kling~~, ~~an early champion of the field’s ideas~~, ~~defines the field thus:~~		'''Social informatics''' is the study of [[information]] and communication tools (ICT) in cultural or institutional contexts.<ref name="KlingUnder">{{cite book \|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=tzTyU6omD74C&printsec=frontcover \|title=Understanding and Communicating Social Informatics: A Framework for Studying and Teaching the Human Contexts of Information and Communication Technologies \|author=Kling, Rob; Rosenbaum, Howard; Sawyer, Steve \|publisher=Information Today, Inc \|year=2005 \|isbn=9781573872287 \|pages=5–11 \|accessdate=27 April 2014}}</ref> "Social Informatics (SI) refers to the body of research and study that examines social aspects of computerization, including the roles of information technology in social and organizational change, the uses of information technologies in social contexts, and the ways that the social organization of information technologies is influenced by social forces and social practices."<ref name="KlingSIOrg">{{cite web \|url=http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ \|title=Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics \|publisher=Indiana University \|accessdate=27 April 2014}}</ref>

	:Social Informatics (SI) refers to the body of research and study that examines social aspects of computerization – including the roles of information technology in social and organizational change, the uses of information technologies in social contexts, and the ways that the social organization of information technologies is influenced by social forces and social practices. [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/]

	==Research==		==Research==
Line 30:		Line 28:

	==References==		==References==
			<references />
	* "Demistifying the Digital Divide: The simple binary notion of technology haves and have-nots doesn't quite compute", an article by Mark Warschauer on page forty-two of the August, 2003 issue of ''Scientific American''		* "Demistifying the Digital Divide: The simple binary notion of technology haves and have-nots doesn't quite compute", an article by Mark Warschauer on page forty-two of the August, 2003 issue of ''Scientific American''

Shawndouglas: Added attribution.

2014-04-24T20:55:29Z

Added attribution.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:55, 24 April 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~''(This article was taken from Wikipedia)''~~

	'''Social informatics''' is the study of [[information]] and communication tools in cultural, or institutional contexts (Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, 2005). Another definition is the interdisciplinary study of the design, uses and consequences of information technologies that takes into account their interaction with institutional and cultural contexts (Kling, "What is Social Informatics and Why Does it Matter?"). A transdisciplinary field, ([http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90]) social informatics is part of a larger body of socio-economic research that examines the ways in which the technological artifact and human social context mutually constitute the information and communications technology (ICT) ensemble. Some proponents of social informatics use the relationship of a biological community to its environment as an analogy for the relationship of tools to people who use them. The [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Center for Social Informatics] founded by the late Dr. Rob Kling, an early champion of the field’s ideas, defines the field thus:		'''Social informatics''' is the study of [[information]] and communication tools in cultural, or institutional contexts (Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, 2005). Another definition is the interdisciplinary study of the design, uses and consequences of information technologies that takes into account their interaction with institutional and cultural contexts (Kling, "What is Social Informatics and Why Does it Matter?"). A transdisciplinary field, ([http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90]) social informatics is part of a larger body of socio-economic research that examines the ways in which the technological artifact and human social context mutually constitute the information and communications technology (ICT) ensemble. Some proponents of social informatics use the relationship of a biological community to its environment as an analogy for the relationship of tools to people who use them. The [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Center for Social Informatics] founded by the late Dr. Rob Kling, an early champion of the field’s ideas, defines the field thus:

Line 18:		Line 16:
	Social Informatics is also about teaching social issues of computing to Computer Science students (Kling & Jewet,1996). Depending on educational traditions, social informatics is scattered in the curriculum of different disciplines, as well as in Computer Science, Information Science, [[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]] (Europe) and Web Sociology (Kling, 1999). In some instances there might be a lack of understanding of why teaching social issues of computing is important, both by individual lecturers and students, resulting in a view that Social Informatics is boring and without importance (Godejord, 2007). Some researchers have pointed out that in order to create awareness of the importance of social issues of computing, one has to focus on didactics of Social Informatics (Godejord, 2007).		Social Informatics is also about teaching social issues of computing to Computer Science students (Kling & Jewet,1996). Depending on educational traditions, social informatics is scattered in the curriculum of different disciplines, as well as in Computer Science, Information Science, [[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]] (Europe) and Web Sociology (Kling, 1999). In some instances there might be a lack of understanding of why teaching social issues of computing is important, both by individual lecturers and students, resulting in a view that Social Informatics is boring and without importance (Godejord, 2007). Some researchers have pointed out that in order to create awareness of the importance of social issues of computing, one has to focus on didactics of Social Informatics (Godejord, 2007).

	== See also ==		==See also==
	*[[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]]		*[[Informatics (academic field)\|Informatics]]

			==External links==
			*[http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics], Indiana University, USA
			*[http://www.social-informatics.org/ Social Informatics.org], University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
			*[http://samfinfo.pbwiki.com/ Social Informatics Resources], Nesna University College, Norway
			*[http://www.informatics.sun.ac.za/SI/ Centre for Knowledge Dynamics and Decision Making], University of Stellenbosch, South Africa

			==Notes==

			This article heavily reuses content from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_informatics the Wikipedia article].

	==References==		==References==
Line 44:		Line 52:

	* Godejord, P.A. (2007). Fighting child pornography: Exploring didactics and student engagement in social informatics, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Volume 58, Issue 3		* Godejord, P.A. (2007). Fighting child pornography: Exploring didactics and student engagement in social informatics, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Volume 58, Issue 3

	~~==Online Resources==~~
	*[http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics], Indiana University, USA
	*[http://www.social-informatics.org/ Social Informatics.org], University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
	*[http://samfinfo.pbwiki.com/ Social Informatics Resources], Nesna University College, Norway
	*[http://www.informatics.sun.ac.za/SI/ Centre for Knowledge Dynamics and Decision Making], University of Stellenbosch, South Africa

	[[Category:Informatics]]		[[Category:Informatics]]

Shawndouglas: Internal link.

2013-09-13T22:34:10Z

Internal link.

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:34, 13 September 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	''(This article was taken from Wikipedia)''		''(This article was taken from Wikipedia)''

	'''Social informatics''' is the study of information and communication tools in cultural, or institutional contexts (Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, 2005). Another definition is the interdisciplinary study of the design, uses and consequences of information technologies that takes into account their interaction with institutional and cultural contexts (Kling, "What is Social Informatics and Why Does it Matter?"). A transdisciplinary field, ([http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90]) social informatics is part of a larger body of socio-economic research that examines the ways in which the technological artifact and human social context mutually constitute the information and communications technology (ICT) ensemble. Some proponents of social informatics use the relationship of a biological community to its environment as an analogy for the relationship of tools to people who use them. The [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Center for Social Informatics] founded by the late Dr. Rob Kling, an early champion of the field’s ideas, defines the field thus:		'''Social informatics''' is the study of [[information]] and communication tools in cultural, or institutional contexts (Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, 2005). Another definition is the interdisciplinary study of the design, uses and consequences of information technologies that takes into account their interaction with institutional and cultural contexts (Kling, "What is Social Informatics and Why Does it Matter?"). A transdisciplinary field, ([http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90]) social informatics is part of a larger body of socio-economic research that examines the ways in which the technological artifact and human social context mutually constitute the information and communications technology (ICT) ensemble. Some proponents of social informatics use the relationship of a biological community to its environment as an analogy for the relationship of tools to people who use them. The [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Center for Social Informatics] founded by the late Dr. Rob Kling, an early champion of the field’s ideas, defines the field thus:

	:Social Informatics (SI) refers to the body of research and study that examines social aspects of computerization – including the roles of information technology in social and organizational change, the uses of information technologies in social contexts, and the ways that the social organization of information technologies is influenced by social forces and social practices. [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/]		:Social Informatics (SI) refers to the body of research and study that examines social aspects of computerization – including the roles of information technology in social and organizational change, the uses of information technologies in social contexts, and the ways that the social organization of information technologies is influenced by social forces and social practices. [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/]

Shawndouglas: Updated cat.

2011-11-22T21:43:19Z

Updated cat.

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:43, 22 November 2011
Line 51:		Line 51:
	*[http://www.informatics.sun.ac.za/SI/ Centre for Knowledge Dynamics and Decision Making], University of Stellenbosch, South Africa		*[http://www.informatics.sun.ac.za/SI/ Centre for Knowledge Dynamics and Decision Making], University of Stellenbosch, South Africa

	~~{{DEFAULTSORT:Social Informatics}}~~		[[Category:Informatics]]
	[[Category:~~Social informatics~~]]

Mikelong88888 at 12:46, 22 July 2011

2011-07-22T12:46:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:46, 22 July 2011
Line 10:		Line 10:
	Social informatics research diverges from earlier, deterministic (both social and technological) models for measuring the social impacts of technology. Such technological deterministic models characterized information technologies as tools to be installed and used with a pre-determined set of impacts on society dictated by the technology’s stated capabilities (Williams & Edge, 1996). Similarly, the socially deterministic theory represented by some proponents of the social construction of technology (SCOT) or social shaping of technology theory as advocated by Williams & Edge (1996) see technology as the product of human social forces. In contrast, some social informatics methodologies consider the context surrounding technology and the material properties of the technology to be equally important: the people who will interact with a system, the organizational policies governing work practice, and support resources. This contextual inquiry produces “nuanced conceptual understanding” of systems that can be used to examine issues like access to technology, electronic forms of communication, and large-scale networks (Kling, 2000).		Social informatics research diverges from earlier, deterministic (both social and technological) models for measuring the social impacts of technology. Such technological deterministic models characterized information technologies as tools to be installed and used with a pre-determined set of impacts on society dictated by the technology’s stated capabilities (Williams & Edge, 1996). Similarly, the socially deterministic theory represented by some proponents of the social construction of technology (SCOT) or social shaping of technology theory as advocated by Williams & Edge (1996) see technology as the product of human social forces. In contrast, some social informatics methodologies consider the context surrounding technology and the material properties of the technology to be equally important: the people who will interact with a system, the organizational policies governing work practice, and support resources. This contextual inquiry produces “nuanced conceptual understanding” of systems that can be used to examine issues like access to technology, electronic forms of communication, and large-scale networks (Kling, 2000).

	Research in social informatics can be categorized into three orientations (Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90). ~~[[Norm (sociology)\|~~Normative]] research focuses on the development of theories based on [[empirical]] analysis that may be used to develop organizational policies and work practices (Kling, 2000, p. 228). The heart of such analyses lies in socio-technical interaction networks (Kling, 2000, p. 219), a framework built around the idea that humans and the technologies they build are ~~“[[Coconstitutionalism\|co~~-~~constitutive]]”~~, bound together, and that any examination of one must necessarily consider the other. Studies of the analytical orientation develop theory or define methodologies to contribute to theorizing in institutional settings (Kling, 2000, p. 229, note 1). Critical analysis, like [[Lucy ~~Suchman]]’s~~ examination of articulation work (1994), examine technological solutions from non-traditional perspectives in order to influence design and implementation (Kling, 200, p. 229, note 1; Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90).		Research in social informatics can be categorized into three orientations (Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90). Normative research focuses on the development of theories based on [[empirical]] analysis that may be used to develop organizational policies and work practices (Kling, 2000, p. 228). The heart of such analyses lies in socio-technical interaction networks (Kling, 2000, p. 219), a framework built around the idea that humans and the technologies they build are “co-constitutive”, bound together, and that any examination of one must necessarily consider the other. Studies of the analytical orientation develop theory or define methodologies to contribute to theorizing in institutional settings (Kling, 2000, p. 229, note 1). Critical analysis, like Lucy Suchman’s examination of articulation work (1994), examine technological solutions from non-traditional perspectives in order to influence design and implementation (Kling, 200, p. 229, note 1; Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90).

	==Future==		==Future==

Mikelong88888: Creation of Article

2011-07-22T12:45:06Z

Creation of Article

New page

''(This article was taken from Wikipedia)''

'''Social informatics''' is the study of information and communication tools in cultural, or institutional contexts (Kling, Rosenbaum, & Sawyer, 2005). Another definition is the interdisciplinary study of the design, uses and consequences of information technologies that takes into account their interaction with institutional and cultural contexts (Kling, "What is Social Informatics and Why Does it Matter?"). A transdisciplinary field, ([http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90]) social informatics is part of a larger body of socio-economic research that examines the ways in which the technological artifact and human social context mutually constitute the information and communications technology (ICT) ensemble. Some proponents of social informatics use the relationship of a biological community to its environment as an analogy for the relationship of tools to people who use them. The [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Center for Social Informatics] founded by the late Dr. Rob Kling, an early champion of the field’s ideas, defines the field thus:

:Social Informatics (SI) refers to the body of research and study that examines social aspects of computerization – including the roles of information technology in social and organizational change, the uses of information technologies in social contexts, and the ways that the social organization of information technologies is influenced by social forces and social practices. [http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/]

==Research==
Historically, social informatics research has been strong in the Scandinavian countries, the UK and Northern Europe (Williams & Edge, 1996, section 1; [http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 93]). Within North America, the field is represented largely through independent research efforts at a number of diverse institutions ([http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf Saywer & Rosenbaum, p. 93]).

Social informatics research diverges from earlier, deterministic (both social and technological) models for measuring the social impacts of technology. Such technological deterministic models characterized information technologies as tools to be installed and used with a pre-determined set of impacts on society dictated by the technology’s stated capabilities (Williams & Edge, 1996). Similarly, the socially deterministic theory represented by some proponents of the social construction of technology (SCOT) or social shaping of technology theory as advocated by Williams & Edge (1996) see technology as the product of human social forces. In contrast, some social informatics methodologies consider the context surrounding technology and the material properties of the technology to be equally important: the people who will interact with a system, the organizational policies governing work practice, and support resources. This contextual inquiry produces “nuanced conceptual understanding” of systems that can be used to examine issues like access to technology, electronic forms of communication, and large-scale networks (Kling, 2000).

Research in social informatics can be categorized into three orientations (Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90). [[Norm (sociology)|Normative]] research focuses on the development of theories based on [[empirical]] analysis that may be used to develop organizational policies and work practices (Kling, 2000, p. 228). The heart of such analyses lies in socio-technical interaction networks (Kling, 2000, p. 219), a framework built around the idea that humans and the technologies they build are “[[Coconstitutionalism|co-constitutive]]”, bound together, and that any examination of one must necessarily consider the other. Studies of the analytical orientation develop theory or define methodologies to contribute to theorizing in institutional settings (Kling, 2000, p. 229, note 1). Critical analysis, like [[Lucy Suchman]]’s examination of articulation work (1994), examine technological solutions from non-traditional perspectives in order to influence design and implementation (Kling, 200, p. 229, note 1; Sawyer & Rosenbaum, 2000, p. 90).

==Future==
Social informatics is a young intellectual movement and its future is still being defined. However, because SST theorists such as Williams and Edge suggest that the amorphous boundaries between humans and technology that emerge in social shaping technology research indicate that technology is not a distinct social endeavor worthy of individual study (1996, section 6, para. 5), indicating that there is a need for social informatics research that bridges the gap between technological and social determinism. This observation, coupled with the many fields that contribute research, suggest a future in which social informatics theories and concepts settle to form a substrate, an “indispensable analytical foundation” (Kling, 2000, p. 229) for work in other disciplines.

==Social Informatics in education==
Social Informatics is also about teaching social issues of computing to Computer Science students (Kling & Jewet,1996). Depending on educational traditions, social informatics is scattered in the curriculum of different disciplines, as well as in Computer Science, Information Science, [[Informatics (academic field)|Informatics]] (Europe) and Web Sociology (Kling, 1999). In some instances there might be a lack of understanding of why teaching social issues of computing is important, both by individual lecturers and students, resulting in a view that Social Informatics is boring and without importance (Godejord, 2007). Some researchers have pointed out that in order to create awareness of the importance of social issues of computing, one has to focus on didactics of Social Informatics (Godejord, 2007).

== See also ==
*[[Informatics (academic field)|Informatics]]

==References==

* "Demistifying the Digital Divide: The simple binary notion of technology haves and have-nots doesn't quite compute", an article by Mark Warschauer on page forty-two of the August, 2003 issue of ''Scientific American''

* Center for Social Informatics – SLIS – Indiana University – Mission (n.d). Retrieved October 18, 2004 from http://www.slis.indiana.edu/CSI/mission.html

* Kim, Jong-Young. [http://www.asis.org/Bulletin/Mar-00/kim.html Social Interaction in Computer-Mediated Communication], ''ASIS Bulletin'' Feb/Mar 2000 

* Kling, R. (2000). Learning about information technologies and social change: The contribution of social informatics. The Information Society, 16(3), 217-232.

* Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H., & Sawyer, S. (2005). Understanding and Communicating Social Informatics: A Framework for Studying and Teaching the Human Contexts of Information and Communications Technologies. Medford, New Jersey: Information Today, Inc.

* Sawyer, S. and Rosenbaum, H. (2000). Social informatics in the information sciences: Current activities and emerging directions. [Electronic Version] Informing Science. 3 (2), 89-95 available at http://www.inform.nu/Articles/Vol3/v3n2p89-96r.pdf

* Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986). Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 11(Nov), 1492-1512.

* Suchman, L. (1994). Supporting articulation work: Aspects of a feminist practice of office technology production. In R. Kling (Ed.), Computerization and Controversy (pp. 407-423). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

* Williams, R., & Edge, D. (1996). The social shaping of technology. Research Policy, 25, 865-899. Retrieved September 1, 2004 from http://www.rcss.ed.ac.uk/technology/SSTRPfull.doc

* Culnan, M. J., & Markus, M. L.. (1987). Information technologies. In F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam. K. H. Roberts, & L. W. porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 420-443). newbury Park, CA: Sage.

* Godejord, P.A. (2007). Fighting child pornography: Exploring didactics and student engagement in social informatics, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Volume 58, Issue 3

==Online Resources==
*[http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/ Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics], Indiana University, USA
*[http://www.social-informatics.org/ Social Informatics.org], University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
*[http://samfinfo.pbwiki.com/ Social Informatics Resources], Nesna University College, Norway
*[http://www.informatics.sun.ac.za/SI/ Centre for Knowledge Dynamics and Decision Making], University of Stellenbosch, South Africa

{{DEFAULTSORT:Social Informatics}}
[[Category:Social informatics]]