Interfacing the human/machine

References

• Alač, M. 2009. Moving android: On social robots and body-in-interaction. Social Studies of Science 39: 491–528.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alač, M., J. Movellan, and F. Tanaka. 2011. When a robot is social. Spatial arrangements and multimodal semiotic engagement in the practice of social robotics. Social Studies of Science 41: 893–926.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2003. Posthumanist performativity. toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Journal of Women in Culture and Society 28: 801–831.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barad, K. 2007. Meeting the universe halfway. Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. 2nd ed. Durham: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Böhme, G. 2012. Invasive technification. Critical essays in the philosophy of technology. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Breazeal, C.L. 2002. Designing sociable robots. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Breazeal, C.L. 2014. Why social robots will change your life. Robohub. https://robohub.org/why-social-robots-will-change-your-life/ (accessed June 6, 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Castañeda, C., and L. Suchman. 2014. Robot visions. Social Studies of Science 44: 315–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cirucci, A.M. 2017. Normative interfaces: Affordances, gender, and race in Facebook. Social Media + Society 3: 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crewe, J. 1997. Transcoding the world: Haraway's postmodernism. Signs 22: 891–905.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, C., E. Ferrara, A. Flammini, F. Menczer, and O. Varol. 2016. The rise of social bots. Communications of the ACM 59: 96–104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickel, S. 2014. Be afraid of the unmodified body! The social construction of risk in enhancement utopianism. In The human enhancement debate and disability: New bodies for a better life, eds M. Eilers, K. Grüber, & C. Rehmann-Sutter, 227–244. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fleck, J., J. Webster, and R. Williams. 1990. Dynamics of information technology implementation. A reassessment of paradigms and trajectories of development. Futures 22: 618–640.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, M. 2015. Rise of the robots: Technology and the threat of a Jobless Future. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Forlizzi, J. 2007. How robotic products become social products: An ethnographic study of cleaning in the home. In Proceedings of the ACMIEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, ed. C. Breazeal, 129–36. New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. 1995. Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison, 2nd ed). New York: Vintage Books.
   Google Scholar
• Galloway, A.R. 2012. The interface effect. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Guzman, A.L., and S.C. Lewi. 2019. Artificial intelligence and communication: A human-machine communication research agenda. New Media & Society 20: 1–17.
   Google Scholar
• Halpern, O. 2015. Beautiful data: A history of vision and reason since 1945. Durham, London: Duke University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Haraway, D. 1990. A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. In Simians, cyborgs, and women. The reinvention of nature, ed. D. Haraway, 149–182. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hayles, K. 1999. How we became posthuman. virtual bodies in cybernetics, literature, and informatics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hayles, K. 2003. Computing the human. In Turbulente Körper, soziale Maschinen. Feministische Studien zur Technowissenschaftskultur, eds. J. Weber, and C. Bath, 99–118. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
   Google Scholar
• Heeren, J. 2013. Where the machines go to school. BI.Research 43: 4–9.
   Google Scholar
• Hepp, A. 2020. Artificial companions, social bots and work bots: Communicative robots as research objects of media and communication studies. Media, Culture & Society 42: 1410–26.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hookway, B. 2014. Interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hörl, E. 2012. Luhmann, the non-trivial machine and the neocybernetic regime of truth. Theory, Culture & Society 29: 94–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hörl, E. 2015. The technological condition. Parrhesia 22: 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Hörl, E. 2017. Introduction to general ecology: The ecologization of thinking. In General ecology: The new ecological paradigm, ed. E. Hörl, 1–74. London: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, T.P. 1986. The seamless web: Technology, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science 16: 281–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karafillidis, A. 2012. Die Recodierung der Soziologie. Zu Harrison C. Whites interfaces. Revue für Postheroisches Management 10: 46–59.
   Google Scholar
• Karafillidis, A. 2018. Die Komplexität von Interfaces. Touchscreens, nationale Identitäten und eine Analytik der Grenzziehung. Berliner Debatte Initial 29: 130–46.
   Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, K. 1997. Sociality with objects: Social relations in postsocial knowledge societies. Theory, Culture & Society 14: 1–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, K. 2014. Scopic media and global coordination: The mediatization of face-to-face encounters. In Mediatization of communication, ed. K. Lundby, 39–62. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Lash, S. 2006. Critique of information. reprint. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Lash, S. 2007. Power after hegemony. Theory, Culture & Society 24: 55–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1991. Technology is society made durable. In A sociology of monsters. Essays on power, technology and domination, ed. J. Law, 103–131. London, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1993. We have never been modern. Cambridge: Mass: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 1994. On technical mediation. Philosophy, sociology, genealogy. Common Knowledge 3: 29–64.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B. 2013. An inquiry into modes of existence. An anthropology of the moderns. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Light, B. 2016. The rise of speculative devices. hooking up with the bots of Ashley Madison. First Monday 21. https://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/6426/5525
   Google Scholar
• Lindemann, G. 2005. The analysis of the borders of the social world: A challenge for sociological theory. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 35: 69–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipp, B. 2017. Analytik des Interfacing. Zur Materialität technologischer Verschaltung in prototypischen Milieus robotisierter Pflege. Behemoth 10: 107–129.
   Google Scholar
• Lipp, B. 2019. Interfacing robotcare. On the techno-politics of innovation. Doctoral thesis. Technical University of Munich, Munich.
   Google Scholar
• Lipp, B. Forthcoming. Caring for robots. How care comes to matter in human-machine interfacing. Social Studies of Science.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luhmann, N. 1990. Technology, environment and social risk: A systems perspective. Industrial Crisis Quarterly 4: 223–231.
   Google Scholar
• Manovich, L. 2002. The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, H. 2020. Robolabs: Building surfaces of intelligibility. In Culturally sustainable social robotics, eds. M. Nørskov, J. Seibt, and O. S. Quick, 27–39. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, Århus: IOS Press.
   Google Scholar
• McLuhan, M. 1964. Understanding media. The extensions of man. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Müller, O., and S. Rotter. 2017. Neurotechnology: Current developments and ethical issues. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience 11. Article 93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nake, F. 2019 [1984]. Human-machine interface. Interface Critique 2: 35–45.
   Google Scholar
• Nake, F. 2017. Das doppelte Bild. In Digitale form, eds. C. Blümle, H. Bredekamp, and M. Bruhn, 40–50. Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Nassehi, A. 2019. Muster. Theorie der digitalen Gesellschaft. Munich: C.H. Beck.
   Google Scholar
• Natale, S. 2021. Deceitful media: Artificial intelligence and social life after the turing test. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schaal, S. 2007. The new robotics. towards human-centered machines. HFSP Journal 1: 115–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields, R. 2006. Boundary-thinking in theories of the present. European Journal of Social Theory 9: 223–237.
   Google Scholar
• Simondon, G. 2009. Technical mentality. Parrhesia 7: 17–27.
   Google Scholar
• Simondon, G. 2017. On the mode of existence of technical objects. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sparrow, R., and L. Sparrow. 2006. In the hands of machines? The future of aged care. Minds and Machines 16: 141–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Star, S.L. 1999. The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist 43: 377–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Straube, T. 2016. Stacked spaces: Mapping digital infrastructures. Big Data & Society 3: 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L. 2007. Human-machine reconfigurations. Plans and situated actions,2nd ed. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Turkle, S. 2005. The second self: Computers and the human spirit. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• White, H.C. 1982. Interfaces. Connections 5: 11–20.
   Google Scholar
• Woolgar, S. 1991. Configuring the user. The case of usability trials. In A sociology of monsters. Essays on power, technology and domination, ed. J. Law, 58–99. London, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar