The DOI matches its Crossref record.
How is technology made?--That is the question!
Abstract
This article reviews constructivist technology studies, and especially the social construction of technology (SCOT). To investigate how these constructivist studies regard the ontology of technology, I will trace their historical development in units of analysis, methodological approaches and research questions. Constructivist technology studies are relativistic in only one sense: methodological. They are agnostic with respect to the ontology of technology. Constructivist studies of technology thus do not primarily answer the question 'what is technology?'; they trace the process 'how to make technology'. Copyright The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Cambridge Political Economy Society. All rights reserved., Oxford University Press.
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
Cited by
Historical threads, missing links, and future directions in AI in education
Williamson, B., & Eynon, R. (2020) · Learning, Media and Technology · doi:10.1080/17439884.2020.1798995 · Cited by 981
Metadata
- Authors
- Bijker, W. E.
- Venue
- Cambridge Journal of Economics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2009-11-11
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 63-76
- ISSN
- 0309-166X (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3545
- OpenAlex
- W1990058188
- Cited by
- 362
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 39.08
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: How is technology made?--That is the question! https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/cje/bep068
- The paper
- Bijker, W. E. (2010). How is technology made?--That is the question! Cambridge Journal of Economics. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bep068
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.
