Development of digital technologies and the agency issue: Towards a new theoretical optics

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

开放存取 开放存取
受限制的访问 ##reader.subscriptionAccessGranted##
受限制的访问 订阅或者付费存取

详细

Digital technologies have radically transformed social reality and created new challenges for theory and practice. This puts under question prevailing scientific ideas about both the possibilities of institutional regulation/coercion of human activities and the transformative potential of human agency. Based on the analysis of discussions in sociological theory and on the review of the latest developments in neigboring disciplines, we propose a conceptual model to describe the possibilities and limitations of human agency in the context of digital reality as a special type of structure. Our focus is on the «strong» agency that is, activities that significantly change social environment. We outline two major points of interest. On the one hand, it is a zone of “conditionally” free creative individual action utilizing the resources of the digital environment as a means to achieve the goals of creating new or transforming existing communities, modes of behavior, practices, etc. On the other hand, it is a zone of “hybrid” agency, that is, human activity, stimulated (at least partially) and supplemented by a targeted, customized system of institutional influence provided by artificial intelligence systems. In our opinion, it is in these areas that the main challenges lie for advancing sociology towards understanding the problem of human agency as a key factor in institutional change, driven to a large extent by the advances in digital technologies.

作者简介

P. Sorokin

HSE University

Email: psorokin@hse.ru
Moscow, Russia

参考

  1. Иванов Д. В. Виртуализация общества. Петербургское востоковедение, 2000.
  2. Иванов Д. В. Глэм-капитализм: общество потребления в XXI в. // Журнал социологии и социальной антропологии. 2011. Т. 14. № 5. С. 9–28.
  3. Кравченко С. А. Амбивалентности цифровизации: востребованность ее национально-культурной модели для устойчивого развития // Социологические исследования. 2022. Т. 9. С. 29–37. doi: 10.31857/S013216250020181-2.
  4. Левашов В. К., Гребняк О. В. Экспансия искусственного интеллекта: ожидания и настроения граждан // Социологические исследования. 2024. № 12. С. 13–23. doi: 10.31857/S0132162524120022.
  5. Резаев А. В., Трегубова Н. Д. «Искусственный интеллект», «онлайн-культура», «искусственная социальность»: определение понятий // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2019. № 6. С. 35–47. doi: 10.14515/monitoring.2019.6.03.
  6. Сорокин П. С., Афанасьева И. А. и др. Востребованность индивидуальной агентности и формы ее поддержки: мета-анализ мирового и российского опыта // Журнал исследований социальной политики. 2025. (В печати).
  7. Сорокин П. С., Редько Т. Д. Современные исследования агентности в сфере образования: систематизация ключевых понятий и разработок // Вопросы образования. 2024. № . 1. С. 236–264. doi: 10.17323/vo-2024-18131.
  8. Сорокин П. С. Проблема «агентности» через призму новой реальности: состояние и направления развития // Социологические исследования. 2023. № 3. С. 103–114. doi: 10.31857/S013216250022927-2.
  9. Сорокин П., Мальцева В. От дискретных навыков – к целостному созидательному человеческому потенциалу: новый подход в теории и практике // Форсайт. 2024. Т. 18. № . 1. С. 6–17. doi: 10.17323/2500-2597.2024.1.6.17.
  10. Ågerfalk P. J. Artificial intelligence as digital agency // European Journal of Information Systems. 2020. Vol. 29. No. 1. P. 1–8. doi: 10.1080/0960085X.2020.1721947.
  11. Brown R. et al. Looking inside the ‘black box’of digital firm scaling: An ethnographically informed conceptualisation // Journal of Business Research. 2025. Vol. 186. С. 114987. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114987.
  12. Brynjolfsson E., Li D., Raymond L. Generative AI at work // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2025. Vol. 140. No. 2. С. 889–942. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjae044.
  13. Brynjolfsson E., Rock D., Syverson C. Artificial intelligence and the modern productivity paradox: A clash of expectations and statistics // National Bureau of Economic Research. 2017. No. w24001. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226613475.003.0001.
  14. Cavazzoni F., Fiorini A., Veronese G. How do we assess how agentic we are? A literature review of existing instruments to evaluate and measure individuals’ agency // Social Indicators Research. 2022. Vol. 159. No. 3. P. 1125–1153. doi: 10.1007/s11205-021-02791-8.
  15. Cetina K. K., Cicourel A. V. Advances in social theory and methodology (RLE social theory): Toward an integration of micro-and macro-sociologies. Routledge, 2014.
  16. Coad A. et al. Capacity constraints as a trigger for high growth // Small Business Economics. 2022. Vol. 59. No. 3. P. 893–923. doi: 10.1007/s11187-021-00558-6.
  17. de Haan F. J., Rotmans J. A proposed theoretical framework for actors in transformative change // Technological forecasting and social change. 2018. Vol. 128. P. 275–286. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2017.12.017.
  18. Emirbayer M., Mische A. What is agency? // American journal of sociology. 1998. Vol. 103.No. 4. P. 962– 1023. doi: 10.1086/231294.
  19. Fletcher A., Benveniste M. Narrative Creativity: An Introduction to how and why. Cambridge University Press, 2025. doi: 10.1017/9781009614801.
  20. Frade C. Social theory and the digital: The institutionalisation of digital sociology // Acta Sociologica. 2025. Vol. 68. No. 1. P. 41–56. doi: 10.1177/00016993241264153.
  21. Lund A., Vestøl J. M. An analytical unit of transformative agency: Dynamics and dialectics // Learning, Culture and Social Interaction. 2020. Vol. 25. P. 100390. doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100390.
  22. McKelvey B., Oh C. Rescuing economics and management from Darwin’s evolution via death-and-replacement by the Baldwin Effect: learning during a lifetime // Management in the Age of Digital Business Complexity. Routledge, 2021. P. 48–109. doi: 10.4324/9780429278211-2.
  23. Passey D. et al. Digital agency: Empowering equity in and through education // Technology, Knowledge and Learning. 2018. Vol. 23. No. 3. P. 425–439. doi: 10.1007/s10758-018-9384-x.
  24. Rees-Jones R.E., Brown R., Jones-Evans D. Trigger points and high growth firms: the vital role of founder “Sensing” and “Seizing” capabilities // International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. 2024. Vol. 30. No. 1. P. 1–22. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-05-2023-0533.
  25. Rotmans J., Verheijden M. Transition Lenses: Seeing in a Different Way // Embracing Chaos. Emerald Publishing Limited, 2023. P. 11–25. doi: 10.1108/978-1-83753-634-420231002.
  26. Schwarz O. Sociological theory for digital society: The codes that bind us together. John Wiley & Sons, 2021.
  27. Siddiq F. et al. New kid on the block? a conceptual systematic review of digital agency // Education and Information Technologies. 2024. Vol. 29. No. 5. P. 5721–5752. doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12038-3.
  28. Sternad D., Mödritscher G. Entrepreneurial leaps: Growth processes in transition phases between dynamic states // Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. 2022. Vol. 46. No. 4. С. 952–984. doi: 10.1177/1042258720929890.

补充文件

附件文件
动作
1. JATS XML
下载

版权所有 © Russian Academy of Sciences, 2025