How Tech and People Together Shape Tourism’s Digital Future

1. What is technological determinism (TD) as a paradigm? Give a brief overview of approximately 200 words.

Technological Determinism (TD) is a paradigm that states that the changing way we work, live, and interact solely depends on technology, which, in turn, determines our lifestyle, places of employment, and interactions. TD implies that technical advancements occur independent of any man-made order, overlooking the significant role played by government, human decisions, and social dynamics in shaping technology (Wyatt, 2008).

In addition to that, there are also a lot of people who unconsciously apply TD concepts. The kind of generalisation that says ‘The internet changed everything’ or ‘AI will take all our jobs’ is TD in action. Yet, this view has been criticised extensively by scholars in Science and Technology Studies (STS) and neighbouring fields in the social sciences, who emphasise how deeply intertwined technology and society are (Wyatt, 2008).

Directly opposing the beliefs of TD, Bijker (2009) argues that technology is not born in a vacuum but instead takes into account social, economic and political influences on its development. Bijker (2009)  criticises TD for its linear and reductionist approach, claiming it overlooks the choices made by users, policymakers, and institutions that shape technological development. By moving the focus away from technology as a driver towards a socially created construct, Bijker (2009) stresses the need to adopt multiple perspectives.

2. What is SCOT? Give a brief overview of approximately 200 words.

The Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) theory suggests that technology is socially constructed through social processes and not serving as an independent force. SCOT offers a critique of the strong version of technological determinism, which suggests that technology leads to social change with little human influence (Bijker, 2009). SCOT emphasises how social, political, and economic factors shape technology. Further to this, SCOT emphasises that human behaviour is significant in terms of technology outcomes.

One of SCOT's main points of emphasis is its interpretative flexibility theory, which maintains that various social groups understand the same technology differently and so apply alternative uses for it. For example, some viewed the introduction of the ordinary bicycle as dangerous while others saw them as innovative catalysts of change, demonstrating interpretive flexibility, as it was perceived and described differently by various groups (Bijker, 2009). That said, this closure does not always imply the implementation of the best design but the powerful, economic and social driven reasoning behind those patterns.

SCOT emphasises how important pertinent social groups, including engineers, legislators, and consumers, are in deciding the form, acceptance, and evolution of different technologies. From this point of view, then, technological evolution cannot be limited to personal decisions and is not predestined. Instead, it is a negotiated embedded process that changes course (Bijker, 2009). Overall, SCOT provides a rich lens through which one may study how technological evolution is negotiated in complex social, political, and cultural settings.

3. What is ANT? Give a brief overview of approximately 200 words.

Actor-Network Theory (ANT) is a sociotechnical framework that analyses how, within networks, human and non-human entities come together to shape technology and society. ANT challenges the established delineation between society and technology by colonising the argument that technologies, objects, and institutions aren’t embodiments but active emerging features in shaping social outcomes (Chitanana, 2021).

As the ANT network indicates, actors (humans and non-humans) have agency within a network. Integrating Web 2.0 technologies, social media not only acts as a platform for human interactions but also moderates our deliberations and decision-making (Chitanana, 2021). The same is true for Massanari (2015), who asserts that the algorithms, governance structures, and content moderation practices enable certain behaviours and cultural practices in a network like Reddit to be experienced as the normal way of functioning on the platform.

ANT helps scholars understand that social and technical factors co-construct innovation, examining the role of technology in a broader social network. Translation is another essential aspect, where different actors negotiate their roles and relationships to stabilise  technological systems. This process demonstrates that technologies do not appear in a void but enter through a complex set of actors influencing their adoption and development (Massanari, 2015).

4. In relation to an example of digital technology and society of your own, how would you explain the relationship between the technology and society and cultural practices using the following research paradigms in approximately 600 words: i. Technological Determinism; ii. The Social Construction of Technologies (SCOT) iii. Actor-Network Theory (ANT)?

An examination of the paradigms of Technological Determinism (TD), the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT), and Actor-Network Theory (ANT) will take place, with the Australian tourism industry and its online booking systems used as a primary case study for exploring the relationship between this technology, culture, and society.

From the TD angle, online booking platforms seem an inevitable product of developments in internet and e-commerce technologies. Technological Determinism sees technology as an independent and self-operating force in society, determining how industries are run, how people live, and how they work (Wyatt, 2007). Given the need only to adapt to new technological conditions, the logic is established that transformation is inevitable for the Australian tourism sector due to the introduction of technology and these systems.

Contrasting this idea, SCOT addresses how technological advancement is not linear or predetermined but rather created and influenced by social, economic, and political powers. Relevant social groups, such as tourists, business owners, developers, and regulators, interpret and shape technologies according to their needs and constraints (Bijker, 2009). For instance, larger tourism operators may have readily embraced online booking systems, but smaller, rural businesses may have been reluctant, fearful of the cost, and complexity. This variability reflects “interpretive flexibility,” a central SCOT notion that shows how distinct social groups assign different meanings and uses to the same technology.

ANT on the other hand provides an additional level of analysis, looking at technologies as a part of fluid sociotechnical networks made up of human and non-human actors (Chitanana, 2021; Massanari, 2015). Online booking systems can no longer be considered purely passive instruments, serving as intermediaries between online bookers and their content. Instead, they are active actors in their own right, intervening in the interactions between destination agents, algorithms, infrastructures, policies, and content. It is important to note that these systems do not only work in an ANT sense. For examole, tourist operators, online users, platforms, software and even user reviews all negotiate their respective roles in the system for it to run effectively, illustrating the ANT process of translation and stabilisation.

In summary, these three paradigms form a layered understanding of technological change. TD highlights the drive of technological evolution, SCOT highlights the connection between society and technology, and ANT emphasises the reciprocal shaping of humans and technologies in networks. Instead of seeing online booking systems simply as the end product of technical advancement, these perspectives show how they are shaped and brought into being through continuing social, cultural and material processes. Building up a better understanding of these paradigms encourages a more critical, comprehensive, and contextual perspective on examining digital innovation in the Australian tourism industry.

Which of these paradigms (TD, ANT, or SCOT) do you find most helpful in thinking about your case study, and/or the relationship between social change and technological innovation more broadly, and why? Approximately 300 words.

Of the three paradigms discussed, Technological Determinism (TD), the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT), and Actor-Network Theory (ANT), ANT provides the most applicable context both the example case study into the impact of online booking systems in the Australian tourism industry, and for the broader context of technological innovation driving change in society.

While treating technological and societal actors as separate is common in both the Technological Determinism (TD) and Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) approaches, ANT is especially attractive as it is based on the idea that human and non-human actors negotiate with one another in an ongoing process. From the perspective of an online booking system, these platforms are not self-contained. They are intertwined in complex networks of tourism operators, visitors, booking software, algorithms, payment gateways, internet infrastructure, and user-generated content such as reviews. No single factor has total control, each player has a part to play in the final outcome. The ANT concept of translation helps account for how these diverse elements negotiate roles and responsibilities, carving out responsibilities to stabilise the system. For instance, a tourism operator has to fit their offer with the logic of the platform’s algorithm, and a user has to trust an algorithm shaped by both automated processes and social input in the form of, for example, reviews.

ANT’s recognition of the productive agency of non-human actors (such as platforms and algorithms) better accounts for the complexity of online booking systems. It also explains, in part, why technology adoption and outcomes differ even under comparable social or technical conditions because the network configurations themselves are always changing.

In summary, ANT allows for a more complex and fluid perspective of technological innovation and can provide valuable insights into tourism’s changing digital environment in which actors routinely contest meaning, purpose and value.

References:

Bijker, W. E. (2009). Social construction of technology. In J. K. B. Olsen, S. A. Pedersen, & V. F. Hendricks (Eds.), A companion to the philosophy of technology (pp. 88–91). Blackwell.

Chitanana, L. (2021). The role of Web 2.0 in collaborative design: An ANT perspective. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(965–980).

Massanari, A. (2015). #Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures. New Media & Society, 19(3), 329–346.

Wyatt, S. (2008). Technological determinism is dead; Long live technological determinism. In E. J. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch, & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies (3rd ed., pp. 165–180). MIT Press.