“A few years ago, Paul Edwards and colleagues (2011) introduced a notion of “science friction”—the idea that scientific datasets do not magically fuse together into a readily accessible “open” stockpile, and instead must be communicated and reshaped in order for scientists to collaborate across them.”
“The Data Friction panel at the American Anthropological Association (AAA) meetings this past year attempted to take the idea of science friction further, and ask what else can we see when we turn our attention to frictionful encounters with data.”
“This panel considered what alternative forms of knowing become possible by paying attention occasions where data fails to be mobile, or to the ways data and bodies resist being bound by models, devices, and infrastructures.”
“What we see when we pay attention to frictions are significant questions of ownership, the slipperiness social relations, and examples of how people inhabit more fundamental social, material and conceptual incommensurabilities that data often surfaces.”
“In Ian Lowrie’s work, we heard about data scientists who manage data pipelines—people who structure the technical workflows for data and algorithms—who can’t pin down what “data” or algorithms” actually are, precisely because they shape shift when they encounter frictions of various kinds.”
“Each movement in the pipeline involves a fusion or transformation of numbers, datasets, and/or algorithms, making it very difficult to separate figure from ground.”
“Similarly, in Yulia Grinberg’s work, we heard from the makers of a wearable device designed to detect stress and arousal who struggled to pinpoint what their sensor actually indexes. The opaque “arousal” sensor picks up on everything from fight or flight responses, to exercise, to amorous feelings, to a general propensity to sweat.”
“Another example is Patricia Lange’s work on Youtube users, who grew surprised and troubled when the social relations they seek online turn out to do work they did not expect. They believe themselves to be in control of their online persona, and were perennially surprised to learn that they are not.”
“In Bryce Peake’s research, we saw the presence of friction more directly addressed by the participants themselves. Those frictions stemmed from both Edward’s notion of friction and the sorts of post-colonial frictions that Tsing (2011) describes. His work involved participating in the “field” by building an open source software tool called Tinn, which ended up in a frictionful encounter with participants over data ownership.”
“sociality in turn has incommensurabilities, both social and material, that sustain its own set of struggles and connections”
“The concept of friction draws our attention to the work of making commensurability emerge, and alternatives when it cannot.”
“As much as pointing out that data is never “raw” is both true and important, the injunction to remember its sociality still holds out the prospect that data, by virtue of its connective semiotic properties, might accrue seemingly on its own in a big pot resting in the cloud.”
“If everything can conceivably be data, perhaps we can also use the notion of friction to ask what work calling something “data” does.”
“We could speculate that framing things as “data” per se might help people suspend their disbelief about the frictions they will no doubt face, and to hold out hope that the stuff might connect to someone or something else (or fear, to the extent those connections can become damaging in the wrong hands).”
“This body of work shows signs that a suspension of disbelief about the possibility that data might not move, or might not mean, could be a productive stance for actors to take.”
“Seeking higher level data science abstractions create numerical commensuration.”
“Maintaining faith in Youtube as a kind of archive creates a hope for kinship and social connection that may or may not be realizable.”
“Both require a faith in the connective properties of data.”
“The hope for commensuration might be one element that persistently keeps it out of view.”
“Edwards, P., Mayernik, M.S., Batcheller, A., Bowker, G. and Borgman, C., 2011. Science friction: Data, metadata, and collaboration. Social Studies of Science, 41 (5), p. 667-690.”
“Fiore-Gartland, B. and Neff, G.(2016). Disruption and the Political Economy of Biosensor Data. In Nafus, D. (ed). Quantified: Biosensors in Everyday Life. MIT Press.”
“Irani, L., 2015. Justice for ‘data janitors’. Public Culture, 15.”
“Gray, M.L., Suri, S., Ali, S.S. and Kulkarni, D., 2016, February. The crowd is a collaborative network. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 134-147). ACM.”
“Strathern, M,. 2005. Partial Connections. Rowman Altamira.”
“Tsing, A.L., 2011. Friction: An ethnography of global connection. Princeton University Press.”