Why Map Issues? On Controversy Analysis as a Digital Method

Bibliographic Data

ID5337580
AuthorsN Marres (0000-0002-8237-6946, Goldsmiths University of London, corresponding author)
Year2015
Volume40
Issue5
Pages655-686
Publication date2015-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueScience Technology & Human Values (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0162-2439 • E-ISSN: 1552-8251
PublisherSAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1177/0162243915574602
PMID26336325
OpenAlexW2128815649
LanguageEN
Citations received139
References cited53

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

Data science · Digital media · Engineering ethics · Impartiality · Political science · Public relations · Qualitative research · Social media · Social science · Sociology · The Internet · Thematic analysis · World Wide Web · Computer Science · Engineering · Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection · Law · Open Source Software Innovations · Social Media and Politics

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access