Week 8: Tying the net

Notes

There’s a lot on the table already. Let’s bring it all together before moving on.

How do you define a network? How would you apply a perspective in which the only real thing in the world is networks and relations, not people, groups, objects, ideas, or symbols? How would you explain this idea to someone else?

The assigned readings for this week serve a different purpose than usual. I’d like everyone to go on a scavenger hunt for Leigh Star’s concept of a “boundary object.” What is it and what are two examples of it? Use every means at your disposal, but be sure to bring your information literacy skills and healthy dose of skepticism. Remember, Star has let us know that she often has to tell people “This is not a boundary object” (Star 2010)!

Keywords

scale, boundary object

Learning outcomes

Be able to apply various reading and search strategies to familiarize oneself with a new concept
Be able to derive an abstract theoretical argument from several empirically grounded analyses
Be able to identify the fundamental unity of the perspectives in social studies of science, communication and information studies, and anthropology

Class agenda

15:05: Arrive in class and move the tables to form islands.

15:10: Place your show-and-tell item on one of the islands. Ryan will distribute paper to the islands for people to write notes.

15:10–15:55: Circulate and look at other people’s displays. Write a note for other people’s displays. Then come back to your own display to observe how other people are interacting with it. Cycle back and forth a few times, and talk amongst yourselves about your impressions of the different things on display. At different points in this period, Ryan will call us together for a group discussion of all of the things on display. So we will all remain standing and talk as a group, for instance, to suggest different groupings of objects we think are related.

15:55–16:05: The gallery walk can continue through the break but people can step out if they need now.

16:05: We come back from the break and sit at the islands.

16:05–16:20: Sitting in small groups, we shift to hear the opening presentations and agenda items from the scheduled presenters. Their presentations are largely the same as past weeks, but they will be offering their definition of a boundary object, plus a question or point for discussion.

16:20–16:30: Each small group at an island will then work together on a shared definition of the concept of a boundary object and identify more examples (for instance from the past readings). These will be added to a shared document projected on screen.

16:30-16:55: General discussion, and time permitting, comments from Ryan on the network paradigm.

If groups are very different, can boundary objects still facilitate coordination among them? What is the limit of their efficacy?
Creators of software and digital media say they can facilitate collaboration in teams by design, but don’t actually facilitate collaboration as well as much simpler tech. Why?

References

Knox, Hannah. 2021. “Hacking Anthropology.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 27 (S1): 108–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.13483.

Seaver, Nick. 2021. “Everything Lies in a Space: Cultural Data and Spatial Reality.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 27 (S1): 43–61. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.13479.

Star, Susan Leigh. 1989. “The Structure of Ill-Structured Solutions: Boundary Objects and Heterogenous Distributed Problem Solving.” In Distributed Artificial Intelligence, edited by Michael N. Huhns and Les Gasser, 2:37–54. San Mateo, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=94079.94081.

———. 2010. “This Is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 35 (5): 601–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243910377624.

Star, Susan Leigh, and James R. Griesemer. 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. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631289019003001.

Star, Susan Leigh, and Karen Ruhleder. 1996. “Steps Toward an Ecology of Infrastructure: Design and Access for Large Information Spaces.” Information Systems Research 7 (1): 111–34. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.7.1.111.