Why Map Issues? On Controversy Analysis as a Digital Method.
Why Map Issues? On Controversy Analysis as a Digital Method.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/0162243915574602
复制
发表时间：
2015-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Marres N
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Marres N
本文总结了最近在科学、技术和社会（STS）等领域的研究中，将争议分析作为一种数字方法来实施的努力，并概述了一种解决数字偏见问题的独特方法。数字媒体技术对在线环境中争议的制定产生重大影响，这有可能破坏通过数字手段进行的争议分析的实质性焦点。为了解决这个问题，我建议将主题重点从争议分析转向问题映射。本文首先区分了目前作为一种数字方法指导争议分析发展的三种广泛框架，即划界主义、话语主义和经验主义。每种方法都已被STS采用，但只有最后一种方法提供了一种“超越公正”的数字化方式。我通过借助社交媒体平台Twitter分析互联网治理问题来展示这种方法。
This article takes stock of recent efforts to implement controversy analysis as a digital method in the study of science, technology, and society (STS) and beyond and outlines a distinctive approach to address the problem of digital bias. Digital media technologies exert significant influence on the enactment of controversy in online settings, and this risks undermining the substantive focus of controversy analysis conducted by digital means. To address this problem, I propose a shift in thematic focus from controversy analysis to issue mapping. The article begins by distinguishing between three broad frameworks that currently guide the development of controversy analysis as a digital method, namely, demarcationist, discursive, and empiricist. Each has been adopted in STS, but only the last one offers a digital “move beyond impartiality.” I demonstrate this approach by analyzing issues of Internet governance with the aid of the social media platform Twitter.