The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Inventing accuracy: an historical sociology of nuclear missile guidance
Abstract
Winner of the 1993 Ludwik Fleck Prize presented by the Society for Social Studies of Science (4S).Among books on the arms race, Donald MacKenzie's stands out for its welcome demystification of the black box of nuclear weapons technology. MacKenzie follows one line of technology - strategic ballistic missile guidance - through a succession of weapons systems to reveal the ordinary workings of a world that is neither awesome nor unstoppable. He uncovers the parameters, the pressures, and the politics that make up the complex social construction of an equally complex technology.MacKenzie argues that it is wrong to assume that missile accuracy (or any other technological artifact) is a natural or inevitable consequence of technological change. By fostering an understanding of how the idea of accuracy was constructed and by uncovering the comprehensible and often mundane processes that have given rise to a frightening nuclear arsenal, he shows that there can be useful and informed intervention in the social processes of weapons construction. He also shows in what sense it is possible, contrary to the common wisdom, to uninvent technologies.Examining the technological politics of the transition from bomber to ballistic missile, MacKenzie describes the processes that transformed both air force and navy ballistic missiles from moderately accurate countercity weapons to highly accurate counterforce ones. He concludes that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union has ever accepted the idea of deterrence as the public understands it.Inventing Accuracy is based on 140 interviews with guidance and navigation technologists, navy and air force military officers, and defense officials Robert McNamara, James Schlesinger, McGeorge Bundy, and John Foster. It brings to light the confluence of forces, both physical and social, that gave rise to a selfcontained system of missile navigation, and it discusses the major U.S. groups involved in the early development of inertial guidance and navigation.Donald MacKenzie has published a number of influential articles on statistics, eugenics, and missile technologies. He is Reader in Sociology at the University of Edinburgh.
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
A space for place in sociology
Gieryn, T. F. (2000) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.463 · Cited by 2,370
Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2009) · Minerva · doi:10.1007/s11024-009-9124-4 · Cited by 1,911
The sociology of expectations in science and technology
Borup, M., Brown, N., Konrad, K., & Van Lente, H. (2006) · Technology Analysis & Strategic Management · doi:10.1080/09537320600777002 · Cited by 1,902
MacKenzie, D., & Millo, Y. (2003) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/374404 · Cited by 1,464
Winner, L. (1993) · Science, Technology, & Human Values · doi:10.1177/016224399301800306 · Cited by 924
Metadata
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 1991-10-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 02
- Pages
- 29-0924-29-0924
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W2024930094
- Cited by
- 745
- References
- 0
- Type
- book review
- 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: Inventing accuracy: an historical sociology of nuclear missile guidance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5860/choice.29-0924
- The paper
- Inventing accuracy: an historical sociology of nuclear missile guidance. (1991). Choice Reviews Online. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.29-0924
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.