Opening the Black Box of AI: A Sociological Study of AI as a Network

Abstract

This study provides a sociological understanding of the production of AI, which is underexplored in the sociology of AI. To achieve this, the study focuses on the AI development process. Utilizing Actor-Network Theory (ANT), this study demonstrates how the development of AI creates a network consisting of both human and nonhuman actors. The sociological literature focuses on how AI is adopted in various social contexts, identifying the social effects of its introduction and use. We investigate AI itself, showing the values and politics that constitute AI sociotechnical systems in the United States. Based on interviews with software engineers residing in Northeastern USA who work on AI and music platforms, the study highlights how humans and nonhuman actors and social forces such as capitalism and imperialism coproduce AI systems. Engineers’ technicality-bound worldview plays a crucial role in their interpretation of AI and the drive for efficiency and profit are foundational values that justify including nonhuman actors such as generative AI platforms and datasets as participants in AI networks. This ultimately results in the production of AI sociotechnical systems that recreate values central to capitalism and imperialism.

Keywords

• Sociology
• Actor-Network Theory
• Artificial Intelligence
• Science and Technology Studies (STS)
• Software Engineering

References

1. Acemoglu, D., Autor, D., Hazell, J., & Restrepo, P. (2022). Artificial intelligence anc jobs: Evicence from online vacancies. Journal of Labor Economics, 40(1), 293-340. google scholar
2. Acorno, T. W. (1988). Introduction to the sociology of music. SeaburY.Acorno, T. W. (2001). The culture industry: Selected essays on mass culture (J. M. Bernstein, Ec.). Routlecge. (Original work publishec 1944). google scholar
3. Airolci, M. (2022). Machine habitus: Toward a sociology of algorithms. PolitY Press. google scholar
4. Airolci, M., Beralco, D. & Gancini, A. (2016). Follow the algorithm: An exploratorY investigation of music on YouTube, Poetics, 57. 1-13. https://coi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2016.05.001 google scholar
5. Akrich, M. (1992). The cescription of technical objects. ln Bijker, W. E., anc Law, J. (Ecs.), Shaping technology-building society: Studies in sociotechnical change, MlT Press. google scholar
6. Angele, C. (2017). Algorithms in practice: Comparing web journalism anC criminal justice. Big Data & Society, 4(2). 1-14. https://Coi.org/10.1177/2053951717718855 google scholar
7. Angele, C. (2020). Metrics at work: Journalism and the contested meaning of algorithms. Princeton UniversitY Press. google scholar
8. Barocas, S., & Selbst, A. D. (2016). Big Cata’s Cisparate impact. California Law Review, 104(3). 671-732. https://www.jstor.org/stable/ 24758720 google scholar

9. Beer, D. (2013). Popular culture and new media: The politics of circulation. Palgrave Macmillan. google scholar
10. Beer, D. (2017). The social power of algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1). 1-13. https://Coi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147 google scholar
11. Berman, E. P. (2012). Creating the market university: How academic science became an economic engine. Princeton UniversitY Press. google scholar
12. Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century. Monthly Review Press. google scholar
13. Brayne, S. (2020). Predict and surveil: Data, discretion, and the future of policing. Oxforc UniversitY Press. google scholar
14. Broussarc, M. (2018). Artificial unintelligence: How computers misunderstand the world. MlT Press. google scholar
15. Buchanan, B. G. (2005). A (verY) brief historY of artificial intelligence. AI Magazine, 26(4). 53-60. https://coi.org/10.1609/aimag.v26i4.1848 google scholar
16. Bucher, T. (2012). Want to be on top? Algorithmic power anC the threat of invisibilitY on Facebook. New Media & Society, 14. 1164-1180. https://coi.org/10.1177/146144481244015 google scholar
17. Burrell, J. & Fourcace, M. (2021). The societY of algorithms. Annual Review of Sociology, 47. 213-217. https://coi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-090820-020800 google scholar
18. Callon, M. (1984). Some elements of a sociologY of translation: comestication of the scallops anc the fishermen of St Brieuc baY. The Sociological Review, 32(1), 196-233.https://coi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.1984.tb00113. google scholar
19. Callon, M. (1986). The sociologY of an actor-network: The case of the electric vehicle. ln Callon, M., Law, J., Rip, A. (Ecs.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology. Palgrave Macmillan. google scholar
20. Callon, M., Law, J. & Rip, A. (1986). Putting texts in their place. ln Callon, M., Law, J. & Rip, A. (Ecs.), Mapping the dynamics of science and technology, Palgrave-Macmillan. google scholar
21. Campero, S. (2021). Hiring anc intra-occupational gencer segregation in software engineering. American Sociological Review, 86(1), 60-92. https://coi.org/10.1177/0003122420971805 google scholar
22. Chang, E. 2019. Brotopia: breaking up the boys’ club of Silicon Valley. Penguin Books. google scholar
23. Cohen, N. (2019). The know-it-alls: The rise of Silicon Valley as a political powerhouse and social wrecking ball. The New Press. google scholar
24. Crawforc, K. (2021). Atlas of AI. Yale UniversitY Press. google scholar
25. Crawforc, K., & Paglen, T. (2021). Excavating Al: The politics of images in machine learning training sets. AI & Soc, 36. 1105-1116. https:// coi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01162-8 google scholar
26. Danks, D., & Loncon, A. J. (2017). Algorithmic bias in autonomous sYstems. ln C. Sierra (Ec.), Proceedings of the 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 4691-4697. google scholar
27. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). Digital inequality: From unequal access to cifferentiatec use. ln K. M. Neckerman (Ec.), Social inequality. New York:Russel Sage Founcation Press. google scholar
28. DYer-Witheforc, N., Kjosen, A. M. & Steinhoff, J. (2019). Inhuman power: Artificial intelligence and the future of capitalism. Loncon:Pluto Press. google scholar
29. Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. Martin’s Press. google scholar
30. Faulkner, W. (2015). ‘Nuts anc bolts anc people’: Gencer troublec engineering icentities. ln Christensen, S., Dicier, C., Jamison, A., Meganck, M., Mitcham, C., NewberrY, B. (Ecs.), Engineering identities, epistemologies and values: Engineering education and practice in context, volume 2 (pp. 23-40). Cham:Springer Press. google scholar
31. Fazelpour, S., & Danks, D. (2021). Algorithmic bias: Senses, sources, solutions. Philosophy Compass, 16(8). 1-16. https://coi.org/10.1111/ phc3.12760 google scholar
32. Fine, B. (2005). From actor-network theorY to political economY. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, 16(4). 91-108. “https://coi.org/10.1080/ 10455750500376057 google scholar
33. Forc, M. (2015). Rise of the robots: Technology and the threat of mass unemployment. Basic Books. google scholar
34. ForsYthe, D. E. (1993). Engineering knowlecge: The construction of knowlecge in artificial intelligence. Social Studies of Science, 23(3), 445-477. https://coi.org/10.1177/030631279302300300 google scholar
35. Fuchs, C. (2010). Labour in informational capitalism anc on the lnternet. The Information Society, 26(3). 176-196. https://coi.org/10. 1080/01972241003712215 google scholar
36. Gille, Z. (2010). Actor networks, moces of procuction, anc waste regimes: Reassembling the macro-social. Environment and Planning, 42. 1049-1064. https://coi.org/10.1068/a42122 google scholar
37. GilroY, P. (1995). The black Atlantic: Modernity and double consciousness. Harvarc UniversitY Press. google scholar
38. Gray, M. L. & Suri, S. (2019). Ghost work: How to stop silicon valley from building a new global underclass. Harper Business. google scholar
39. Golcberg, D. E. (2006). The entrepreneurial engineer. WileY Press. google scholar
40. Hanna, A., Denton, E., Smart, A., & Smith-Louc, J. (2019). Towarcs a critical race methocologY in algorithmic fairness. Proceedings of Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. https://coi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1912.03593 google scholar
41. Hashemi, M., & Hail, M. (2020). Criminal tenCencY Cetection from facial images anC the genCer bias effect. Journal of Big Data, 7(2), 1-16. doi: 10.1186/s40537-019-0282-4 google scholar
42. Hughes, T. (1986). The seamless web: TechnologY, science, etcetera, etcetera. Social Studies of Science, 16(2), 281-292. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0306312786016002004 google scholar
43. James, A., & Whelan, A. (2021). ‘Ethical’ artificial intelligence in the welfare state: Discourse anC Ciscrepancyin Australian social services. Critical Social Policy, 42, 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/026101832098546 google scholar
44. Jasanoff, S. (2002). New MoCernities: Reimagining Science, TechnologY anC Development. Environmental Values, 11(3), 253-276. https:// www.jstor.org/stable/30301896 google scholar
45. Jaton, F. (2020). The constitution of algorithms: Ground-truthing, programming, formulating. CambriCge: MlT Press. google scholar
46. Jeske, M. (2022). Organs and humans on chips: Translation, biomedical models, and the political economy of innovation (Doctoral Cissertation, UniversitY of California, San Francisco). google scholar
47. Johnson, G.M. (2021). Algorithmic bias: on the implicit biases of social technologY. Synthese, 198, 9941-9961. Coi:10.1007/ s11229-020-02696-Y google scholar
48. JoYce, K., & Cruz, T. M. (2024). A SociologY of Artificial lntelligence: lnequalities, Power, anC Data Justice. Socius, 10. https://doi.org/10. 1177/23780231241275393 google scholar
49. JoYce, K., Smith-Doerr, L., Alegria, S., Bell, S., Cruz, T., Hoffman, S. G., Noble, S. U., & ShestakofskY, B. (2021). TowarC a sociologY of artificial intelligence: A call for research on inequalities anC structural change. Socius, 7. 1-11. https://Coi.org/10.1177/23780231219995 google scholar
50. Kajava, K. & SawhneY, N. (2023). Language of algorithms: AgencY, metaphors anC Celiberations in Al Ciscourses. ln S. LinCgren (EC.), Handbook of critical studies of artificial intelligence. ECwarC Elgar Publishing. google scholar
51. KarakaYali, N., Kostem, B. anC, & Galip, l. (2018). RecommenCation systems as technologies of the self: Algorithmic control anC the formation of music taste. Theory, Culture & Society, 35(2), 3-24. https://Coi.org/10.1177/02632764177223 google scholar
52. Katz, Y. (2020). Artificial whiteness: Politics and ideology in artificial intelligence. Columbia UniversitY Press. google scholar
53. Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Algorithms at work: The new contesteC terrain of control. The Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366-410. https://Coi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0174 google scholar
54. Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. SAGE. google scholar
55. Kleinman, D. L. (2003). lmpure cultures: University biology and the world of commerce. UniversitY of Wisconsin Press. google scholar
56. Latour, B. (1993). We have never been modern. HarvarC UniversitY Press. google scholar
57. Latour, B. (1994). On technological meCiation: PhilosophY, sociologY, genealogY, Common Knowledge, 3(2), 29-64. https://sciencespo.hal.science/hal-02057233 google scholar
58. Latour, B. (2000). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. HarvarC UniversitY Press. google scholar
59. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network theory. OxforC UniversitY Press. google scholar
60. Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton UniversitY Press. google scholar
61. Lee, K. (2018). AI superpowers: China, Silicon Valley and the new world order. Houghton Mifflin. google scholar
62. Liu, Z. (2021). Sociological perspectives on artificial intelligence: A tYpological reaCing. Sociology Compass, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/ soc4.12851 google scholar
63. Lupton, D. (2015). Digital sociology. RoutleCge Press.Marx, K. (1992). Capital: Volume 1 (B. Fowkes, EC..). Penguin Books. (Original work publisheC 1867). google scholar
64. Marvasti, A. B. (2003). Qualitative research in sociology. ThousanC Oaks:SAGE. google scholar
65. Mateescu, A. & Ticona, J. (2020). lnvisible work, visible workers: VisibilitY regimes in online platforms for Comestic work. ln D. AceveCo (EC.), Beyond the algorithm: Qualitative insights for regulating gig work. CambriCge UniversitY Press. google scholar
66. MeYer, A., Barr, E., BirC, C. & Zimmermann, T. (2021). ToCaY Was a GooC DaY: The DailY Life of Software Developers. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 47(5), 863-880. https://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/TSE.2019.2904957 google scholar
67. Mühlhoff, R. (2020). Human-aiCeC artificial intelligence: Or, how to run large computations in human brains? TowarC a meCia sociologY of machine learning. New Media & Society, 22(10), 1868-1884. Coi: 10.1177/146144481988533 google scholar
68. Natale, S., & Ballatore, A. (2020). lmagining the thinking machine: Technological mYths anC the rise of artificial intelligence. Conver-gence, 26(1), 3-18.https://Coi.org/10.1177/1354856517715164 google scholar
69. Natale, S., & Ballatore, A. (2023). Technological failures, controversies anC the mYth of Al. ln S. LinCgren (EC.), Handbook of critical studies of artificial intelligence. ECwarC Elgar Publishing. google scholar
70. Newberry, B. (2015a). Efficiency animals: Efficiency as an engineering value. In Christensen, S., Didier, C., Jamison, A., Meganck, M., Mitcham, C., NewberrY, B. (Ecs.), Engineering identities, epistemologies and values: Engineering education and practice in context, volume 2 (pp. 199-215). Springer Press. google scholar
71. Noble, D. F. (1977). America by design: Science, technology and the rise of corporate capitalism. Alfrec A. Knopf Publishing. google scholar
72. Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. NYU Press. google scholar
73. O’Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown. google scholar
74. ObermeYer, Z., Powers, B., Vogeli, C., & Mullainathan, S. (2019). Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm usec to manage the health of populations. Science, 366(6464), 447-453. https://Coi.org/l0.1126/science.aax2342 google scholar
75. Ozer, M., Perc, M., & Suna H.E. (2024). Artificial intelligence bias anc the amplification of inequalities in the labor market. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 69, 159-168. coi:10.26650/JECS2023-14150855 google scholar
76. Ozer, M. & Perc, M. (2024). Human complementation must aic automation to mitigate unemploYment effects cue to Al technologies in labor market. Reflektif Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2). 503-514.https://coi.org/10.47613/reflektif.2024.176 google scholar
77. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. Penguin Press. google scholar
78. Parisi, L. (2013). Contagious architecture: Computation, aesthetics, and space. MlT Press. google scholar
79. Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Harvarc UniversitY Press. google scholar
80. Perc, M., Ozer, M., & Hojnik, J. (2019). Social anc juristic challenges of artificial intelligence. Palgrave Communications, 5(61). coi:10.1057/ s41599-019-0278-xhttps://coi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0278-x google scholar
81. Rhee, J. (2018). The robotic imaginary: The human and the price of dehumanized labor. UniversitY of Minnesota Press. google scholar
82. Roberge, J., & Castelle, M. (2021). Towarc an enc-to-enc sociologY of 21st-centurY machine learning. ln J. Roberge & M. Castelle (Ecs.),. The cultural life of machine learning: An incursion into critical AI studies (pp. 1-29). Springer lnternational Publishing. google scholar
83. Russell, S. & Norvig, P. (2020). Artificial intelligence: A modern approach. Pearson Press. google scholar
84. Sachs, S. E. (2019). The Algorithm at work? Explanation anc repair in the enactment of similaritY in art cata. Information, Communication & Society, 23(11). 1689-1705. https://coi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1612933 google scholar
85. Sacowski, J. (2020). Too smart: How digital capitalism is extracting data, controlling our lives, and taking over the world. MlT Press. google scholar
86. SelwYn, N. (2004). Reconsicering political anc popular uncerstancings of the cigital civice. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341-362. https:// doi.org/10.1177/146144480404251 google scholar
87. Sheikh, H., Prins, C. & Schrijvers, E. (2023). Mission AI: The new system technology. Springer Press. google scholar
88. ShestakofskY, B. (2017). Working algorithms: Software automation anc the future of work. Work and Occupations, 44(4), 376-462. https:// doi.org/10.1177/0730888417726119 google scholar
89. ShestakofsY B. & Kelkar. (2020). Making Platforms Work: Relationship Labor anc the Management of Publics. Theory & Society, 49, 86396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-020-09407-z google scholar
90. Sismonco, S. (2010). An introduction to science and technology studies. Blackwell. google scholar
91. Slater, M. (2013). Love in the time of algorithms: What technology does to meeting and mating. Current Publishing. google scholar
92. Ticona, J. Mateescu, A. (2018). Trustec strangers: Cultural entrepreneurship on comestic work platforms in the on-cemanc economy. New Media & Society, 20(11). 4384-4404. https://coi.org/10.1177/1461444818773727 google scholar
93. Turino, T. (2000). Nationalists, cosmopolitans, and popular music in Zimbabwe. UniversitY of Chicago Press. google scholar
94. Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society. SAGE. google scholar
95. Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital civice research, achievements anc shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4-5), 221-235. https://coi.org/10.1016/j. poetic.2006.05.004 google scholar
96. Verbeek, P. (2005). What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency and design. PennsYlvania UniversitY Press. google scholar
97. Vicsek, L. (2020). Artificial intelligence anc the future of work: Lessons from the sociologY of expectations. International Journal of Sociology & Social Policy, 41(7/8), 842-861. coi: 10.1108/lJSSP-05-2020-0174 google scholar
98. Wach, K., Duong, C.D., Ej’Cys, J., Kazlauskaite, R., KorzYnski, P., Mazurek, G., Paliszkiewicz, J., & Ziemba, E. (2023). The Çark siCe of generative artificial intelligence: A critical analYsis of the controversies anc risks of ChatGPT. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 11(2), 7-30. https://Coi.org/10.15678/EBER.2023.110201 google scholar
99. Weber, M. (1958). The rational and social foundations of music (D. MartinCale, J. RieCel, & G. Neuwirth, Trans. & ECs.). Southern lllinois UniversitY Press. (Original work publisheC 1921). google scholar
100. White, H. (2013). Materiality, form and context: Marx contra Latour. Victorian Studies, 55(4). 667-682. https://doi.org/10.2979/victorianst udies.55.4.667 google scholar
101. Winner, L. (1980). Do artifacts have politics?. Daedalus, 109(1). 121-136. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20024652 google scholar
102. Woolgar, S. (1985). WhY not a sociologY of machines? The case of sociologY anc artificial intelligence. Sociology, 19(4). 557-572. https:// www.jstor.org/stable/42853468 google scholar
103. Zajko, M. (2022). Artificial intelligence, algorithms, anc social inequalitY: Sociological contributions to contemporarY cebates. Sociology Compass, 16(3). https://coi.org/10.1111/soc4.12962 google scholar
104. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs. google scholar