[1]
Agar, J. 2013. Constant touch: a global history of the mobile phone. Icon.
[2]
Allan, S. 2002. Media, risk, and science. Open University Press.
[3]
Allan, S. 2002. Media, risk, and science. Open University Press.
[4]
Anderson, A. 2005. The Framing of Nanotechnologies in the British Newspaper Press. Science Communication. 27, 2 (Dec. 2005), 200–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547005281472.
[5]
Attias, B. et al. 2013. DJ culture in the mix: power, technology, and social change in electronic dance music. Bloomsbury Academic.
[6]
Attwood, F. et al. eds 2013. Controversial images: media representations on the edge. Palgrave Macmillan.
[7]
BALSAMO, A. 1995. Forms of Technological Embodiment: Reading the Body in Contemporary Culture. Body & Society. 1, 3–4 (Nov. 1995), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X95001003013.
[8]
Bauer, M.W. 2005. Public Perceptions and Mass Media in the Biotechnology Controversy. International Journal of Public Opinion Research. 17, 1 (Mar. 2005), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edh054.
[9]
Bell, A.R. 2011. Science as ‘Horrible’: Irreverent Deference in Science Communication. Science as Culture. 20, 4 (Dec. 2011), 491–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2011.605921.
[10]
Bell, D. 2006. Science, technology and culture. Open University Press.
[11]
Berger, A.A. 2014. What objects mean: an introduction to material culture. Left Coast Press.
[12]
Biagioli, M. 1999. The science studies reader. Routledge.
[13]
Bijker, W.E. et al. 2012. The social construction of technological systems: new directions in the sociology and history of technology. MIT Press.
[14]
Bolter, J.D. 1993. Turing’s man: western culture in the computer age. Penguin.
[15]
Bourdieu, P. 1990. Photography: a middle-brow art. Polity.
[16]
Bowler, P.J. and Morus, I.R. 2005. Making modern science: a historical survey. University of Chicago Press.
[17]
Camic, C. et al. 2011. Social knowledge in the making. University of Chicago Press.
[18]
Clarke, G. 1997. The photograph. Oxford University Press.
[19]
Collins, H.M. and Pinch, T.J. 2002. The Golem at large: what you should know about technology. Cambridge University Press.
[20]
David, M. 2005. Science in society. Palgrave Macmillan.
[21]
Devine-Wright, P. 2005. Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy. 8, 2 (Apr. 2005), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/we.124.
[22]
van Dijck, J. 2008. Digital photography: communication, identity, memory. Visual Communication. 7, 1 (Feb. 2008), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357207084865.
[23]
Epstein, S. 2008. Culture and science / technology: rethinking knowledge, power, materiality, and nature. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 619, (2008), 165–182.
[24]
Erickson, M. 2005. Science, culture and society: understanding science in the twenty-first century. Polity.
[25]
Garcia-Montes, J.M. 2006. Changes in the self resulting from the use of mobile phones. Media, Culture & Society. 28, 1 (Jan. 2006), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443706059287.
[26]
Gregory, J. and Miller, S. 2000. Science in public: communication, culture, and credibility. Persius Books.
[27]
Hackett, E.J. and Society for Social Studies of Science 2008. The handbook of science and technology studies. MIT Press.
[28]
Hallman, B.C. and Benbow, S.M.P. 2007. Family leisure, family photography and zoos: exploring the emotional geographies of families. Social & Cultural Geography. 8, 6 (Dec. 2007), 871–888. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360701712636.
[29]
Hand, M. 2011. Ubiquitous photography. Polity.
[30]
Hitchings, R. 2008. Air conditioning and the material culture of routine human encasement: the case of young people in contemporary Singapore. Journal of Material Culture. 13, 3 (Nov. 2008), 251–265. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183508095495.
[31]
Hjorth, L. et al. 2012. Studying mobile media: cultural technologies, mobile communication, and the iPhone. Routledge.
[32]
Jones, G. 2010. Beauty imagined: a history of the global beauty industry. Oxford University Press.
[33]
Kasperson, R.E. et al. 1988. The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework. Risk Analysis. 8, 2 (June 1988), 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x.
[34]
Kleinman, D.L. 2005. Science and technology in society: from biotechnology to the Internet. Blackwell Pub.
[35]
Larsen, J. and Sandbye, M. eds 2014. Digital snaps: the new face of photography. I.B. Tauris.
[36]
Latour, B. 2004. How to Talk About the Body? the Normative Dimension of Science Studies. Body & Society. 10, 2–3 (June 2004), 205–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034X04042943.
[37]
Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press.
[38]
Latour, B. 1987. Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press.
[39]
Leyshon, M. et al. 2013. Mobile Technologies and Youthful Exploration: Stimulus or Inhibitor? Urban Studies. 50, 3 (Feb. 2013), 587–605. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098012468897.
[40]
Licoppe, C. 2011. What Does Answering the Phone Mean? A Sociology of the Phone Ring and Musical Ringtones. Cultural Sociology. 5, 3 (Sept. 2011), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975510378193.
[41]
Locke, S. 2005. Fantastically reasonable: ambivalence in the representation of science and        technology in super-hero comics. Public Understanding of Science. 14, 1 (Jan. 2005), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662505048197.
[42]
Lupton, D. 2013. Risk. Routledge.
[43]
Lupton, D. and Tulloch, J. 2002. ‘Life would be pretty dull without risk’: Voluntary risk-taking and its pleasures. Health, Risk & Society. 4, 2 (July 2002), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698570220137015.
[44]
MacKenzie, D.A. and Wajcman, J. 1999. The social shaping of technology. Open University Press.
[45]
Magaudda, P. 2014. The Broken Boundaries between Science and Technology Studies and Cultural Sociology: Introduction to an Interview with Trevor Pinch. Cultural Sociology. 8, 1 (Mar. 2014), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1749975513484604.
[46]
Mapping the Field: Specialist science news journalism in the UK national media: http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/research/researchgroups/riskscienceandhealth/fundedprojects/mappingscience.html.
[47]
Matthewman, S. 2011. Technology and social theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
[48]
McQuire, S. 2013. Photography’s afterlife: Documentary images and the operational archive. Journal of Material Culture. 18, 3 (Sept. 2013), 223–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183513489930.
[49]
McVeigh, B. Commodifying Affection, Authority and Gender in the Everyday Objects of Japan. Journal of Material Culture. 1, 3, 291–312.
[50]
Michael Mulkay and G. Nigel Gilbert 1982. Joking Apart: Some Recommendations concerning the Analysis of Scientific Culture. Social Studies of Science. 12, 4 (1982), 585–613.
[51]
Miller, S. 2001. Public understanding of science at the crossroads. Public Understanding of Science. 10, 1 (Jan. 2001), 115–120. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/10/1/308.
[52]
Peters, H.P. et al. 2008. Science-Media Interface: It’s Time to Reconsider. Science Communication. 30, 2 (Sept. 2008), 266–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547008324809.
[53]
Peters, H.P. 1995. The interaction of journalists and scientific experts: co-operation and conflict between two professional cultures. Media, Culture & Society. 17, 1 (Jan. 1995), 31–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/016344395017001003.
[54]
Pickering, A. 1992. Science as practice and culture. University of Chicago Press.
[55]
Pickstone, J.V. 2001. Ways of knowing: a new history of science, technology and medicine. University of Chicago Press.
[56]
Pinto, B. et al. 2015. Communicating through humour: A project of stand-up comedy about science. Public Understanding of Science. 24, 7 (Oct. 2015), 776–793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513511175.
[57]
Powell, R.C. 2007. Geographies of science: histories, localities, practices, futures. Progress in Human Geography. 31, 3 (June 2007), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132507077081.
[58]
Regula Valérie Burri 2008. Doing Distinctions: Boundary Work and Symbolic Capital in Radiology. Social Studies of Science. 38, 1 (2008), 35–62.
[59]
Renn, O. 1998. Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges. Journal of Risk Research. 1, 1 (Jan. 1998), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/136698798377321.
[60]
Riesch, H. et al. 2013. Internet-based public debate of CCS: Lessons from online focus groups in Poland and Spain. Energy Policy. 56, (May 2013), 693–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.029.
[61]
Riesch, H. 2015. Why did the proton cross the road? Humour and science communication. Public Understanding of Science. 24, 7 (Oct. 2015), 768–775. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662514546299.
[62]
Riesch, H. and Spiegelhalter, D.J. 2011. Careless pork costs lives: Risk stories from science to press release to media. Health, Risk & Society. 13, 1 (Feb. 2011), 47–64.
[63]
Schwarz, O. 2010. Negotiating Romance in Front of the Lens. Visual Communication. 9, 2 (May 2010), 151–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357210369982.
[64]
Silva, E. 2000. The cook, the cooker and the gendering of the kitchen. The Sociological Review. 48, 4 (Nov. 2000), 612–628. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.00235.
[65]
Sismondo, S. 2010. An introduction to science and technology studies. Wiley-Blackwell.
[66]
Stirling, A. 2007. Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. Talking point on the precautionary principle. EMBO reports. 8, 4 (Apr. 2007), 309–315. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.embor.7400953.
[67]
Stocking, S.H. and Holstein, L.W. 2008. Manufacturing doubt: journalists’ roles and the construction of ignorance in a scientific controversy. Public Understanding of Science. 18, 1 (Aug. 2008), 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662507079373.
[68]
Storey, J. 2012. Cultural theory and popular culture: an introduction. Pearson.
[69]
Thompson, L. and Cupples, J. 2008. Seen and not heard? Text messaging and digital sociality. Social & Cultural Geography. 9, 1 (Feb. 2008), 95–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360701789634.
[70]
Tilley, C. 2006. Handbook of material culture. SAGE Publications.
[71]
Turney, J. 1998. Frankenstein’s footsteps: science, genetics and popular culture. Yale University Press.
[72]
Van House, N.A. 2011. Personal photography, digital technologies and the uses of the visual. Visual Studies. 26, 2 (June 2011), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1472586X.2011.571888.
[73]
Vannini, P. 2009. Material culture and technology in everyday life: ethnographic approaches. Peter Lang.
[74]
Vialles, N. 1994. A place that is no place. Animal to edible. Cambridge University Press. 15–28.
[75]
Vivienne, S. and Burgess, J. 2013. The remediation of the personal photograph and the politics of self-representation in digital storytelling. Journal of Material Culture. 18, 3 (Sept. 2013), 279–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359183513492080.
[76]
VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1 (2012) | Institute for Critical Animal Studies (ICAS): http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/volume-10-issue-1-2012/.
[77]
Wainwright, S.P. 2004. Epiphanies of embodiment: injury, identity and the balletic body. Qualitative Research. 4, 3 (Dec. 2004), 311–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794104047232.
[78]
Wajcman, J. et al. 2008. Families without Borders: Mobile Phones, Connectedness and Work-Home Divisions. Sociology. 42, 4 (Aug. 2008), 635–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508091620.
[79]
Weingart, P. et al. 2003. Of Power Maniacs and Unethical Geniuses: Science and Scientists in Fiction Film. Public Understanding of Science. 12, 3 (July 2003), 279–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662503123006.
[80]
Wessels, B. 2010. Understanding the Internet: a socio-cultural perspective. Palgrave Macmillan.
[81]
Woodward, I. 2007. Understanding material culture. Sage Publications.
[82]
WYNNE, B. 1992. Uncertainty and environmental learning 1, 2Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environmental Change. 2, 2 (June 1992), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-3780(92)90017-2.
[83]
Yearley, S. 2005. Making sense of science: understanding the social study of science. SAGE Publications.
[84]
1 AD. Actor-network theory, technology and medical sociology: An illustrative analysis of the metered dose inhaler. Sociology of health & illness. 18, (1 AD), 198–219.
[85]
2007. Cosmetic surgery and the televisual makeover: A Foucauldian feminist reading. Feminist media studies. 7, (2007), 17–32.
[86]
2 AD. Essentials of Risk Theory (SpringerBriefs in Philosophy). Springer; 2013 edition.
[87]
2004. Mutton cut up as lamb: Mothers, daughters and cosmetic surgery. Continuum (Mount Lawley, W.A.). 18, (2004), 525–539.
[88]
17 AD. The Palgrave handbook of social theory in health,iIllness and medicine. Palgrave MacMillan.