The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enacting the social
Abstract
This paper is concerned with the power of social science and its methods. We first argue that social inquiry and its methods are productive: they (help to) make social realities and social worlds. They do not simply describe the world as it is, but also enact it. Second, we suggest that, if social investigation makes worlds, then it can, in some measure, think about the worlds it wants to help to make. It gets involved in ‘ontological politics’. We then go on to show that its methods - and its politics - are still stuck in, and tend to reproduce, nineteenth-century, nation-state-based politics. How might we move social science from the enactment of nineteenth-century realities? We argue that social-and-physical changes in the world are - and need to be - paralleled by changes in the methods of social inquiry. The social sciences need to re-imagine themselves, their methods, and their ‘worlds’ if they are to work productively in the twenty-first century where social relations appear increasingly complex, elusive, ephemeral, and unpredictable. There are various possibilities: perhaps, for instance, there is need for ‘messy’ methods. But in the present paper we explore some implications of complexity theory to see whether and how this might provide productive metaphors and theories for enacting twenty-first-century realities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Path dependence in historical sociology
Mahoney, J. (2000) · Theory and Society · doi:10.1023/a:1007113830879 · Cited by 3,469
Cited by
Sociomaterial practices: exploring technology at work
Orlikowski, W. J. (2007) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840607081138 · Cited by 3,248
Organizing for Innovation in the Digitized World
Yoo, Y., Boland, R. J., Lyytinen, K., & Majchrzak, A. (2012) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1120.0771 · Cited by 2,469
Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory
Feldman, M. S., & Orlikowski, W. J. (2011) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0612 · Cited by 1,753
10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization
Orlikowski, W. J., & Scott, S. V. (2008) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520802211644 · Cited by 2,571
The Usability Construct: A Dead End?
Tractinsky, N. (2018) · Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1080/07370024.2017.1298038 · Cited by 87
Researching Family Relationships: A Qualitative Mixed Methods Approach
Gabb, J. (2009) · Methodological Innovations Online · doi:10.1177/205979910900400204 · Cited by 86
The state of affairs: Critical performativity and the online dating industry
Roscoe, P., & Chillas, S. (2014) · Organization · doi:10.1177/1350508413485497 · Cited by 57
"We Would Never Write That Down": Classifications of Unemployed and Data Challenges for AI
Petersen, A. C. M., Christensen, L. R., Harper, R., & Hildebrandt, T. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3449176 · Cited by 37
‘I Is; Therefore I Am’: The Census as Practice of Double Identification
Ruppert, E. S. (2008) · Sociological Research Online · doi:10.5153/sro.1778 · Cited by 17
Jekope Ramala, M., & Ruwhiu, D. (2024) · Asia Pacific Viewpoint · doi:10.1111/apv.12424 · Cited by 6
Conceptualising Contestability: Perspectives on Contesting Algorithmic Decisions
Lyons, H., Velloso, E., & Miller, T. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3449180 · Cited by 4
The Ontological Politics of Heritage; or How Research Can Spoil a Good Story
Waterton, E., & Watson, S. (2015) · The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary Heritage Research · doi:10.1057/9781137293565.0007
Metadata
- Authors
- Law, J., & Urry, J.
- Venue
- Economy and Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-08
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 390-410
- ISSN
- 0308-5147 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-5766
- OpenAlex
- W2038420893
- Cited by
- 1,258
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 59.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.