Key Quote
|
Negative consequences of information and communications technology are often the result of unforeseen and unexplored interactions with surrounding social institutions. Dr. Kling uses the example of law enforcement wants and warrants systems. These systems, which allow police officers in one jurisdiction to find out if an individual is wanted in another jurisdiction and thus capture many criminals who may have fled after being charged in the original jurisdiction, are being deployed nationwide. At first glance, use of such systems seems uncontroversial. The goal of catching more criminals is clearly a laudable one and this seems to be a clear case where technology can be used to help law enforcement organizations do their job more effectively. Dr. Kling notes that there are many similar systems out there, financial control systems, for example, that help to catch errors or reduce fraud. In each of these cases, however, an initial laudable system idea can end up backfiring in some ways, as a result of the disruptions it causes in the surrounding organizational fabric.
In the case of wants and warrants systems, the changes that the system has wrought on the judicial and penal organizations call into question the efficacy of the system. The initial expectation was that such as system would make it much more likely for police in City X to capture a criminal wanted for murder in City Y. In reality, most of the wants and warrants that populate the system, however, are for misdemeanors and minor felonies, not heinous crimes like murder and rape. Regardless, police believe that if there is a want or warrant, it should be acted upon. As a result, the vast majority of arrests that are made as a result of the system are not of violent criminals; few rapists and murderers are ever caught, because they are lost in the sea of warrants for less offences. The further consequence of this is that the courts and jails, already overburdened, are further stressed by this influx of relatively minor misdemeanors and minor felonies. It is difficult to establish whether the original goal of increasing the chance that fleeing violent criminals would be caught is achieved and whether whatever results are achieved are outweighed by the additional stress caused to the system overall. This is a controversial issue among law enforcement officials; Dr. Kling suggests that a great deal of more research needs to be done to answer these sorts of questions, but that it is not being done right now.
The key point to take away is that it is not the just the technology and its immediate users that will be effected by technological change. One must look at the entire social system in which technology will be embedded. Some phenomena can be unpredictable, but the deeper implications of system decisions need to be explored. Systems are implemented within a certain regime and context and the effects of using such a technology can ripple out far from the initial source, potentially making a problem worse, instead of better. Dr Kling also notes that this is a good example of the fact that potential negative consequences may take a decade or two to sort themselves out. Because patterns of problems may take some time to emerge, it is difficult to tell what the positive and negative consequences of using technology from the outset or even after a short period of use.
The research community does not have a consensus about the negative or positive social aspects of computerization. There are a variety of researchers that have done a wide variety of research, but it is often integrated into other research communities and not brought together, where more meaningful bonds can be forged. There are individuals in the fields of psychology, sociology, communications, and information systems departments in business schools all working on this issue, but there have not been enough forums with which to bring these people together. Many fields do not regard this work as central to the discipline.
While Dr. Kling points out that there are many good sociologists doing work in the field, overall, issues of technology and social change have not been considered important to the field of sociology. There is a growing awareness that there are new phenomena worth examining, as an increasing number of sociologists who were not interested in these questions before have recently gotten interested. Dr. Kling says the same is true for the other social sciences, except for communications studies. Even with communications studies, however, they have concentrated mostly on issues of mass media. "There is a research world, but I would call it diffuse, rather than tightly integrated."
There are various literatures discussing computerization and its potential negative consequences. Unfortunately, oversimplification, and high levels of unrealistic optimism, with occasional, shadowy worries, dominate the most accessible, popular literature. As you move closer to the research literature, the questions and answers get increasingly subtle and sophisticated. Research tends to be complicated, but also somewhat dull and not dramatic. Findings tend to be modest and ideas tend to accumulate across a number of studies, not with just one large study. "Questions of what generalizes and what does not takes some reflection, but reporters are looking for a good story and people want a quick, simple takeaways, but that doesn't lead to a deeper understanding of socio-technical change."
With journalists and other general audience writers, ideas tend to simplify and are overly optimistic. The views tend to be upbeat and transformational, with only occasional shadowy doubts about technology's efficacy rising to the surface. Much of the literature, popular and otherwise, is dominated by speculation. While this is not necessarily bad, true understanding of the effects of computerization takes a long time to achieve. It is not just a matter of the technology itself, either; "technologies have few effects by themselves, the context of their use, their surrounding social and political regimes, their packaging, these elements don't pop either." Dr. Kling also notes that if research findings are felt to be chilling, those who have very strong vested interests in selling products and services often work to marginalize or inhibit the reporting of these negatives.
Hara, Noriko, and Rob Kling. "Student Distress in a Web-Based Distance Education Course." Information, Communication and Society 3, no. 4 (2000): 557–79.
Kling , Rob and Charles Dunlop, eds. Computerization and Controversy: Value Conflicts and Social Choices. San Diego, Academic Press, 1991.
» Next: Dr. Ellen A. Wartella