Bibliographical References of Readings

Week 1: Introduction

Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: Penguin Press. The Empathy Diaries. [Canvas] [Course Reserve at Wells Library: P96.T42 T85 2015]

Week 2: Discourses about IT

Kling, R. (1994). Reading "all about" computerization: How genre conventions shape non-fiction social analysis. The Information Society,10(3), 147-172. [Canvas]

Sawyer, S. & Chen, T. T. (2003). Conceptualizing information technology in the study of information systems: Trends and issues. In E. H. Wynn, E. A. Whitley, M. D. Myers, & J. I. DeGross, (Eds.), Global and organizational discourse about information technology(pp. 109-131). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.[Canvas]

Lindqvist, U., & Neumann, P. G. (2017). Inside risks: The future of the Internet of Things. Communications of the ACM, 60(2), 26-30. [Online]

Examples of genres (please skim):

Social realism: Arora, P. (2010). Digital gods: The making of a medical fact for rural diagnostic software. The Information Society, 26(1), 70-79. [Online]

Analytical reductionism: Liao, Q. V., Wagner, C., Pirolli, P, & Fu, W. (2012). Understanding experts’ and novices’ expertise judgment of twitter users. Proceedings of the 2012 Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. [Online]

Social theory: Kling, R., McKim, G., & King, A. (2003). A bit more to IT: Scholarly communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(1), 47-67. [Online]

For doctoral students only:

Webster, F. (2014). Theories of information society. Chapter 1: Introduction. [Canvas]

Week 3: The Social Shaping of Technology: Social Informatics & STS

Kling, R., Rosenbaum, H., & Sawyer, S. (2005). Understanding and communicating social informatics: A framework for studying and teaching the human contexts of information and communication technologies. Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc. Chapters 1 & 2. [Canvas]

Bauchspies, W. K., Croissant, J. & Restivo, S. (2006). Science, technology, and society: A sociological approach. Chapter 1 only. Chapter 2 is an optional reading. [Canvas]

Sanfilippo M., & Fichman, P. (2014). The evolution of social informatics research (1984-2013). In P. Fichman & H. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Social informatics: Past, present and future. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. [Online]

Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: Penguin Press. The flight from conversation (pp. 19-56). [Course Reserve at Wells Library: P96.T42 T85 2015]

Doctoral students only:

Webster, F. (2014). Theories of information society. Chapter 6: Network society: Manuel Castells. [Course Reserve at Wells Library: HM1206 .W43 2014]

Additional readings:

Bijker, W. E. (2001). Social construction of technology. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Vol 23. pp. 15522-15527. Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd. [Canvas]

Kling, R. (2007). What is social informatics and why does it matter? The Information Society, 23(4), 205-220. [Online]

Fichman, P., & Rosenbaum, H. (2014). (Eds.). Social informatics: Past, present and future. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. [Online]

Week 4: Content Production: Wikipedia

König, R. (2013). Wikipedia: Between lay participation and elite knowledge representation. Information, Communication & Society, 16(2), 160–177. [Canvas]

Kane, G. C., Johnson, J., & Majchrzak, A. (2014). Emergent life cycle: The tension between knowledge change and knowledge retention in open online coproduction communities. Management Science, 60(12): 3026-3048. [Online]

Morgan, J. T., Mason, R. M., & Nahon, K. (2012). Negotiating cultural values in social media: A case study from Wikipedia. Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3490-3499. [Canvas]

Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: Penguin Press. Chapter: One chair. [Course Reserve at Wells Library: P96.T42 T85 2015]

Additional reading:

Forte, A., & Lampe, C. (2013). Defining, understanding, and supporting open collaboration. American Behavioral Scientists, 57(5), 535-547. [Online]

Fichman, P., & Hara, N (Eds). (2014). Global Wikipedia: International and cross-cultural issues in online collaboration. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. [Course reserve at Wells Library: ZA4482 .G56 2014]

Week 5: Science Communication: Credibility and Sensemaking of Information

Ceccarelli, L. (2011). Manufactured scientific controversy: Science, Rhetoric, and public debate. Rhetoric & Public Affairs, 14(2), 195-228. [Online]

Jang, S. M. (2014). Seeking congruency or incongruency online? Examining selective exposure to four controversial science issues. Science Communication, 36(2),143-167. [Online]

Garrett, R. K. (2017). Strategies for countering false information and beliefs about climate change. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. [Online]

Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: Penguin Press. Chapter: Two chair [Course Reserve at Wells Library: P96.T42 T85 2015]

Additional readings:

Peters, H. P., Dunwoody, S., Allgaier, J., Lo, Y., & Brossard, D. (2014). Public communication of science 20. EMBO Reports 15, 749-753. [Canvas]

Yang, J., Counts, S., Morris, M.R., & Hoff, A., (2013). Microblog credibility perceptions: Comparing the USA and China. Proceedings of the 2013 Annual Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. [Online]

Week 7: Boundaries

Star, S. L., Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, “translations’ and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology, 1907-39. Social Studies of Science, 19(3), 387-420. doi:10.1177/030631289019003001 [Online]

Jain, R., Cao, L., Mohan, K., & Ramesh, B. (2015). Situated boundary spanning: An empirical investigation of requirements engineering practices in product family development. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 5(3), 16. [Online]

Hara, N., & Fichman, P. (2014). Frameworks for understanding knowledge sharing in open online communities: Boundaries and boundary crossing. In P. Fichman & H. Rosenbaum (Eds), Social Informatics: Past, Present and Future. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. [Canvas]

Doctoral students only:

Barrett, M., Oborn, E., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2012). Reconfiguring boundary relations: Robotic innovations in pharmacy work. Organization Science, 23(5), 1448-1466. [Online]

Week 8: IT and Political/Civic Participation

Webster, F. (2014). Theories of the Information Society, Chapter 9: Information and democracy 1: Jürgen Habermas, the public sphere and public service institutions. [Canvas] [Course Reserve at Wells Library: HM1206 .W43 2014]

Bonilla, Y., & Rosa, J. (2015). #Ferguson: Digital protest, hashtag ethnography, and the racial politics of social media in the United States. American Ethnologist, 42(1), 4-17. [Online]

Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2012). The logic of connective action. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 739-768. [Online]

Doctoral students only:

Webster, F. (2014). Theories of the Information Society. Chapter 7: Mobilities. [Course Reserve at Wells Library: HM1206 .W43 2014]

Additional readings

Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Walker, S. (2014). Organization in the crowd: Peer production in large-scale networked protests. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 232-260. [Online]

Porta, D. D. (2014). Comment on organizing in the crowd. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 269-271. [Online]

Webster, F. (2014). Theories of the Information Society, Chapter 10: Information and democracy 2: Friedrich von Hayek and the neo-Hayekians. [Course Reserve at Wells Library: HM1206 .W43 2014]

Week 9: Net neutrality

PBS NewsHour. (April 27, 2017). FCC chair Ajit Pai explains why he wants to scrap net neutrality. [Online]

Faris, R., Roberts, H., Etling, B., Othman, D., & Benkler, Y. (2016). The role of the networked public sphere in the U.S. net neutrality policy debate. International Journal of Communication, 10, 5839-5864. [Online]

Kasperkevic, J. (July 10, 2017). Net neutrality explained: “Imagine internet is pizza…” [Online]

Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: Penguin Press. Chapter: Three chairs. [Course Reserve at Wells Library: P96.T42 T85 2015]

Week 10: Unintended Consequences of Social Media

Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation. Chapters: The Path Forward; A Fourth Chair? [Course Reserve at Wells Library: P96.T42 T85 2015]

Foot, K. (2014). The online emergence of pushback on social media in the United States: A historical discourse analysis. International Journal of Communication, 8, 1313-1342. [Online]

Silverman, C., & Singer-Vine, J. (December 6, 2016). Most Americans who see fake news believe it, new survey says. BuzzFeedNews. [Online]

Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2016). The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM, 59(7), 96-104. [Online]

Week 12: Scholarly Communication/Open Access/Ownership

Suber, P. (2015). Open access overview. [Online]

Priego, E. (2016). Signal, not solution: Notes on why sci-hub is not opening access. The Winnower [Online]

Coalition for Networked Information (May, 2017). Rethinking institutional repository strategies: Report of a CNI executive roundtable. [Online]

Bodo, B. (2016). Pirates in the Library: An Inquiry into the Guerilla Open Access Movement. Paper prepared for the 8th Annual Workshop of the International Society for the History and Theory of Intellectual Property, CREATe, University of Glasgow, UK, July 6-8, 2016. [Online]

Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Hajjem, C., & Hilf, E. R. (2008). The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access: An update. Serials Review, 34(1), 36-40. [Canvas]

Van Noorden, R. (March 27, 2013). Open access: The true cost of science publishing. Nature, 495(7442). [Online]

Salo, D. (2008). Innkeeper at the Roach Motel. Library Trends, 57(2). [Online]

For doctoral students only:

Peters, M. A. (2010). On the philosophy of open science. Review of Contemporary Philosophy, 9, 105-142. [Canvas]

Additional readings:

Grand, A., Wilkinson, C., Bultitude, K., & Winfield, A. F. T. (2012). Open science: A new “trust technology”? Science Communication, 34(5), 679-689. [Online]

Bjork, B., Laakso, M., Welling, P., & Paetau, P. (2014). Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 65(2), 237-250. [Online]

Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y, Oppenheim, C., Stamerjohanns, H., & Hilf, E. (2004). The green and the gold roads to open access. Serials Review, 30(4), 310-314. [Online]

Evans, J. A., & Reimer, J. (2009). Open access and global participation in science. Science, 323, 5917, 1025. [Online]

Antelman, K. (2004). Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College & Research Libraries, 65, 372-382. [Online]

Week 13: Technology and Privacy

Hubaux, J., & Juels, A. (2016, June). Privacy is dead, long live privacy. Communications of the ACM, 59(6), 39-41. [Online]

Mai, J. (2016). Big data privacy: The datafication of personal information. The Information Society, 32(3), 192-199. [Online]

Rubel, A., & Jones, K. M., L. (2016). Student privacy in learning analytics: An information ethics perspective. The Information Society, 32(2), 143-159. [Online]

For doctoral students only:

Webster, F. (2014). Theories of the Information Society, Chapter 11: Information, reflexivity and surveillance: Anthony Giddens [Course Reserve at Wells Library: HM1206 .W43 2014]

Additional readings:

Schoonmaker, S. (2012). Hacking the global: Constructing markets and commons through free software. Information, Communication & Society, 15(4), 502-518. [Online]

Waters, S., Ackerman, J. (2011). Exploring privacy management on Facebook: Motivations and perceived consequences of voluntary disclosure. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(1), 101-115. [Online]

Weitzner, D. J., Abelson, H., Berners-Lee, T., Feigenbaum, J., Hendler, J., & Sussman, G. J. (2008). Information accountability. Communications of the ACM, 51(6), 82-87. [Online]

Week 15: Infrastructure

Plantin, J., Lagoze, C., Edwards, P. N., Sandvig, C. (2016). Infrastructure studies meet platform studies in the age of Google and Faceboook. New Media & Society, doi:10.1177/1461444816661553 [Online]

Shilton, K. (2017). Engaging values despite neutrality: Challenges and approaches to values reflection during the design of infrastructure. Science, Technology, & Human Values. [Online]

Khatoun, R., & Zeadally, S. (2016). Smart cities: Concepts, architectures, research opportunities. Communications of the ACM, 59(8), 46-57. [Online]