Building an Apparatus: Refractive, Reflective, and Diffractive Readings of Trace Data

We propose a set of methodological principles and strategies for the use of trace data, i.e., data capturing performances carried out on or via information systems, often at a fine level of detail. Trace data comes with a number of methodological and theoretical challenges associated with the inseparable nature of the social and material. Drawing on Haraway and Barad’s distinctions among refraction, reflection and diffraction, we compare three approaches to trace data analysis. We argue that a diffractive methodology allows us to explore how trace data are not given but created though construction of a research apparatus to study trace data. By focusing on the diffractive ways in which traces ripple through an apparatus, it is possible to explore some of the taken-for-granted, invisible dynamics of sociomateriality. Equally, important this approach allows us to describe what and when distinctions within entwined phenomena emerge in the research process. Empirically, we illustrate the guiding principles and strategies by analyzing trace data from Gravity Spy, a crowdsourced citizen science project on Zooniverse. We conclude by suggesting that a diffractive methodology may help us draw together quantitative and qualitative research practices in new and productive ways that also raises interesting design questions. Draft of 28 May 2018

[1]  M. Callon,et al.  Peripheral Vision , 2005 .

[2]  Matthew Jones,et al.  A Matter of Life and Death: Exploring Conceptualizations of Sociomateriality in the Context of Critical Care , 2014, MIS Q..

[3]  R. Stuart Geiger,et al.  Trace Ethnography: Following Coordination through Documentary Practices , 2011, 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[4]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  What Difference Does a Robot Make? The Material Enactment of Distributed Coordination , 2015, Organ. Sci..

[5]  R. Boland Phenomenology: a preferred approach to research on information systems , 1986, Trends in Information Systems.

[6]  Yanni Loukissas,et al.  Taking Big Data apart: local readings of composite media collections , 2017 .

[7]  J. V. Maanen,et al.  Toward a theory of organizational socialization , 1977 .

[8]  R. Ruiz,et al.  Sein und zeit , 2007 .

[9]  S. Barley Technology as an occasion for structuring: evidence from observations of CT scanners and the social order of radiology departments. , 1986, Administrative science quarterly.

[10]  D. Haraway,et al.  Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium. FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse , 1997 .

[11]  M. Foucault,et al.  Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977 , 1980 .

[12]  T. Schatzki The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change , 2002 .

[13]  Kai Riemer,et al.  Clarifying Ontological Inseparabiilty with Heidegger's Analysis of Equipment , 2017, MIS Q..

[14]  Libby Hemphill,et al.  Human-machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions, 2nd ed , 2007, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[15]  Davide Nicolini,et al.  Organizational Knowledge: The Texture of Workplace Learning , 2006 .

[16]  Cheri Ostroff,et al.  ORGANIZATIONAL SOCIALIZATION AS A LEARNING PROCESS: THE ROLE OF INFORMATION ACQUISITION , 2006 .

[17]  Ann,et al.  Truth and method , 1994, Journal of Religion and Health.

[18]  Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic,et al.  From Substantialist to Process Metaphysics - Exploring Shifts in IS Research , 2016, IS&O.

[19]  Sean P. Goggins,et al.  Network analysis of trace data for the support of group work: activity patterns in a completely online course , 2010, GROUP.

[20]  Susan V. Scott,et al.  10 Sociomateriality: Challenging the Separation of Technology, Work and Organization , 2008 .

[21]  Andrew Pickering,et al.  The mangle of practice : time, agency, and science , 1997 .

[22]  J. Brown,et al.  Knowledge and Organization: A Social-Practice Perspective , 2001 .

[23]  Amy Bruckman,et al.  Becoming Wikipedian: transformation of participation in a collaborative online encyclopedia , 2005, GROUP.

[24]  Jonathon E. Mote,et al.  The laws of the markets , 2000 .

[25]  Roger H. L. Chiang,et al.  Big Data Research in Information Systems: Toward an Inclusive Research Agenda , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[26]  Carsten S. Østerlund,et al.  Motivations for Sustained Participation in Crowdsourcing: Case Studies of Citizen Science on the Role of Talk , 2015, 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[27]  A. Pickering The mangle of practice : time, agency, and science , 1997 .

[28]  Pierre Bourdieu,et al.  Outline of a Theory of Practice , 2020, On Violence.

[29]  E. Srensen The Materiality of Learning: Technology and Knowledge in Educational Practice , 2009 .

[30]  D. Swartz Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu , 1998 .

[31]  Carsten S. Østerlund,et al.  Planet hunters and seafloor explorers: legitimate peripheral participation through practice proxies in online citizen science , 2014, CSCW.

[32]  W. Orlikowski The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in management research , 2010 .

[33]  A. Giddens Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis , 1979 .

[34]  Robin Teigland,et al.  Expanding the horizons of digital social networks: Mixing big trace datasets with qualitative approaches , 2016, Inf. Organ..

[35]  W. Orlikowski Sociomaterial Practices: Exploring Technology at Work , 2007 .

[36]  Erez Lieberman Aiden,et al.  Uncharted: Big Data as a Lens on Human Culture , 2013 .

[37]  M. D. Myers,et al.  Dialectical hermeneutics: a theoretical framework for the implementation of information systems , 1995, Inf. Syst. J..

[38]  Matthew R. Jones,et al.  Information systems and the double mangle: steering a course between the Scylla of embedded structure and the Charybdis of strong symmetry , 1998 .

[39]  Carsten S. Østerlund,et al.  Sociomaterial-Design: Bounding Technologies in Practice , 2014 .

[40]  Kevin Crowston,et al.  Validity Issues in the Use of Social Network Analysis with Digital Trace Data , 2011, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[41]  Ofer Arazy,et al.  Analyzing Organizational Routines in Online Knowledge Collaborations: A Case for Sequence Analysis in CSCW , 2015, CSCW.

[42]  Coye Cheshire,et al.  Readers are not free-riders: reading as a form of participation on wikipedia , 2010, CSCW '10.

[43]  Rajiv Sabherwal,et al.  Usability and Sociability in Online Communities: A Comparative Study of Knowledge Seeking and Contribution , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[44]  Aaron Halfaker,et al.  Using edit sessions to measure participation in wikipedia , 2013, CSCW.

[45]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[46]  Carsten S. Østerlund,et al.  Which Way Did They Go?: Newcomer Movement through the Zooniverse , 2016, CSCW.

[47]  Carsten S. Østerlund,et al.  Blending Machine and Human Learning Processes , 2017, HICSS.

[48]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing , 2010, MIS Q..

[49]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Theorizing Practice and Practicing Theory , 2011, Organ. Sci..

[50]  H. Klein,et al.  THE EFFECTIVENESS OF AN ORGANIZATIONAL‐LEVEL ORIENTATION TRAINING PROGRAM IN THE SOCIALIZATION OF NEW HIRES , 2000 .

[51]  Karen Barad Posthumanist Performativity: Toward an Understanding of How Matter Comes to Matter , 2003, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society.

[52]  Sue Newell,et al.  The Sociomaterialty of Information Systems: Current Status, Future Directions , 2014, MIS Q..

[53]  Karlheinz Kautz,et al.  Sociomateriality at the royal court of IS: A jester's monologue , 2013, Inf. Organ..

[54]  Kalle Lyytinen,et al.  Design theory for dynamic complexity in information infrastructures: the case of building internet , 2010, J. Inf. Technol..

[55]  S. Kvale,et al.  InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing , 1996 .

[56]  Wanda J. Orlikowski,et al.  Entanglements in Practice: Performing Anonymity Through Social Media , 2014, MIS Q..

[57]  Carsten S. Østerlund,et al.  Relations in Practice: Sorting Through Practice Theories on Knowledge Sharing in Complex Organizations , 2005, Inf. Soc..

[58]  Nicholas Berente,et al.  Toward Generalizable Sociomaterial Inquiry: A Computational Approach for Zooming In and Out of Sociomaterial Routines , 2014, MIS Q..

[59]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  Crossing an Apparent Chasm: Bridging Mindful and Less-Mindful Perspectives on Organizational Learning , 2006, Organ. Sci..

[60]  J. Law After Method: Mess in Social Science Research , 2004 .

[61]  A. Katsaggelos,et al.  Gravity Spy: integrating advanced LIGO detector characterization, machine learning, and citizen science , 2016, Classical and quantum gravity.

[62]  Anne S. Miner,et al.  Organizational Improvisation and Learning: A Field Study , 2001 .

[63]  Aaron Halfaker,et al.  Making peripheral participation legitimate: reader engagement experiments in wikipedia , 2013, CSCW.

[64]  Veda C. Storey,et al.  Business Intelligence and Analytics: From Big Data to Big Impact , 2012, MIS Q..

[65]  Shoshana Zuboff Surveillance Capitalism and the Challenge of Collective Action , 2019, New Labor Forum.

[66]  Isaac Holeman,et al.  Room for Silence: Ebola Research, Pluralism and the Pragmatic Study of Sociomaterial Practices , 2018, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).