Field Exam:Social Informatics List Fall 2004 No. 2
From GSLISWiki
Social Informatics 1 - October 15, 2004
See also:
[edit] 1. Foundations
Daft, R.L. & Lengel, R.H. (1986), Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.
Davenport, E. and Hall, H. (2002), Organizational knowledge and communities of practice, Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 171-227.
DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M.S. (1994), Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-147.
Kling, R. (1999), What is social informatics and why does it matter? D-Lib Magazine (January 1999)
Kling, R. (2000), Learning about information technologies and social change: The contribution of social informatics. The Information Society 16(3), 217-232.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Forward-Hanks, W., Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation (p. 13-24)
- Ch. 1: Lave, J. & Wenger, E., Legitimate peripheral participation (p.27-43)
Markus, M.L. (1990). Toward a "critical mass" theory of interactive media. In J. Fulk & C.W. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and Communication Technology , p. 194-218.
Nardi, Bonnie A. (1996). Studying context: A comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition. In Nardi, Bonnie A. (Ed.) Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, p. 69-102.
Sawyer, S. & Eschenfelder, K. (2002), Social informatics: perspectives, examples, and trends. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 427-464.
Walther, J.B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.; New York, N.Y., Cambridge University Press: 72-85.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. (2002), Cultivating communities of practice: a guide to managing knowledge, Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press.
[edit] 2. The Mutual Relationship between the Technology and the Social
The Social Construction of Technology /The Social Impacts of Technologies
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W.R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001), Social implications of the internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27: 307-336.
Gasser, L. (1986), The integration of computing and routine work", ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 4(3), 205-225.
Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, weak and latent ties and the impact of new media. The Information Society, 18(5), 385-401.
Herring, S.C. (2002), Computer-mediated communication on the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 109-168.
Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helge-son, V. & Crawford, A. (2002), Internet paradox revisited, Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49-74.
Ling, R. S. (2004), The mobile connection: the cell phone's impact on society. San Francisco, CA, Morgan Kaufmann: 57-81.
MacKenzie, D. A. & Wajcman, J. (1999), The Social Shaping of Technology. Buckingham England; Philadelphia, Open University Press.
- Ch. 1: MacKenzie & Wajcman. The Social Shaping of Technology. (p. 3-27)
- Ch. 7: Kline & Pinch. The Social Construction of Technology. (p.113-115)
Markus, M. L. & Keil, M. (1994), If we build it, they will come: Designing information systems that people want to use, Sloan Management Review, 35(4):11-25.
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000), Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations, Organization Science, 11(4), 404-428.
Oudshoorn, N. & Pinch, T. J. (2003), Introduction: How Users and Non-Users matter. In Oudshoorn, N. & Pinch, T. J., How users matter: the co-construction of users and technologies. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press: 1-25.
Van Dijk, J. and Hacker, K. (2003), The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon, The Information Society, 19(4), 315-326.
[edit] 3. Context/Environment
Alversson, M. (2004), Knowledge management: departures from knowledge and/or management. In Alversson, M, Knowledge Work and Knowledge-Intensive Firms, (p166-187), Oxford University Press.
Ardichivili, A. Page, V. & Wentling, T. (2003), Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 64-77.
Ford, D.P. & Chan, Y.E. (2003), Knowledge sharing in a multi-cultural setting: A case study. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 1(1), July, 11-27.
Gupta, A. & Govindarajan, V. (2000), Knowledge Management's Social Dimension: Lessons from Nucor Steel, Sloan Management Review, Fall 2000, 71-80.
Kollock, P. & Smith, M.A. (1996), Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In S. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (p. 109-128). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Nardi, B. & O'Day, V. (1999), Information ecologies : using technology with heart. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press p.49-58
- Ch. 4: Nardi, B. & O'Day, V., Information Ecologies (p. 49-58)
Orlikowski, W. (1992), Learning from notes: organizational issues in groupware implementation. ACM Conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, 362-369.
