1.
Matthewman S. Technology and Social Theory. Vol Traditions in social theory. Palgrave Macmillan; 2011.
2.
Sismondo S. An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. 2nd ed. Wiley-Blackwell; 2010. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=320473&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
3.
Storey J. Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction. 6th ed. Pearson; 2012. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=390393&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
4.
Woodward I. Understanding Material Culture. Sage Publications; 2007. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=255990&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
5.
Attias B, Gavanas A, Rietveld HC. DJ Culture in the Mix: Power, Technology, and Social Change in Electronic Dance Music. Bloomsbury Academic; 2013. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?authtype=ip,shib&custid=s1123049&direct=true&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&site=ehost-live&scope=site&AN=647332
6.
Bell D. Science, Technology and Culture. Vol Issues in cultural and media studies. Open University Press; 2006. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=95071&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
7.
Berger AA. What Objects Mean: An Introduction to Material Culture. Second edition. Left Coast Press; 2014. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=1253206&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s1123049
8.
Biagioli M. The Science Studies Reader. Routledge; 1999.
9.
Bijker WE, Hughes TP, Pinch TJ. The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. Anniversary ed. MIT Press; 2012. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=365530&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
10.
Bowler PJ, Morus IR. Making Modern Science: A Historical Survey. University of Chicago Press; 2005.
11.
Camic C, Gross N, Lamont M. Social Knowledge in the Making. University of Chicago Press; 2011. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=325024&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
12.
Collins HM, Pinch TJ. The Golem at Large: What You Should Know about Technology. Vol Canto. Cambridge University Press; 2002. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=41445&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
13.
David M. Science in Society. Palgrave Macmillan; 2005. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=86049&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
14.
Erickson M. Science, Culture and Society: Understanding Science in the Twenty-First Century. Polity; 2005.
15.
Hackett EJ, Society for Social Studies of Science. The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. 3rd ed. MIT Press; 2008. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=209920&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
16.
Kleinman DL. Science and Technology in Society: From Biotechnology to the Internet. Vol Key themes in sociology. Blackwell Pub; 2005. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=202829&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
17.
MacKenzie DA, Wajcman J. The Social Shaping of Technology. 2nd ed. Open University Press; 1999.
18.
Pickering A. Science as Practice and Culture. University of Chicago Press; 1992. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=nlebk&AN=349593&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s1123049
19.
Pickstone JV. Ways of Knowing: A New History of Science, Technology and Medicine. University of Chicago Press; 2001.
20.
Tilley C. Handbook of Material Culture. SAGE Publications; 2006. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=419419&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
21.
Vannini P. Material Culture and Technology in Everyday Life: Ethnographic Approaches. Vol Intersections in communications and culture. Peter Lang; 2009.
22.
Wessels B. Understanding the Internet: A Socio-Cultural Perspective. Palgrave Macmillan; 2010.
23.
Yearley S. Making Sense of Science: Understanding the Social Study of Science. SAGE Publications; 2005. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=37093&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
24.
Epstein S. Culture and science / technology: rethinking knowledge, power, materiality, and nature. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2008;619:165-182. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40375801?pq-origsite=summon&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
25.
The Palgrave Handbook of Social Theory in Health,iIllness and Medicine. Palgrave MacMillan; 17 AD.
26.
Hitchings R. Air conditioning and the material culture of routine human encasement: the case of young people in contemporary Singapore. Journal of Material Culture. 2008;13(3):251-265. doi:10.1177/1359183508095495
27.
Magaudda P. The Broken Boundaries between Science and Technology Studies and Cultural Sociology: Introduction to an Interview with Trevor Pinch. Cultural Sociology. 2014;8(1):63-76. doi:10.1177/1749975513484604
28.
Powell RC. Geographies of science: histories, localities, practices, futures. Progress in Human Geography. 2007;31(3):309-329. doi:10.1177/0309132507077081
29.
Silva E. The cook, the cooker and the gendering of the kitchen. The Sociological Review. 2000;48(4):612-628. doi:10.1111/1467-954X.00235
30.
McVeigh B. Commodifying Affection, Authority and Gender in the Everyday Objects of Japan. Journal of Material Culture. 1(3):291-312. https://intra.brunel.ac.uk/s/Library/Digital%20Readings/SO2603%20MCVEIGH%20Commodifying.pdf
31.
Allan S. Media, Risk, and Science. Vol Issues in cultural and media studies. Open University Press; 2002.
32.
Anderson A. The Framing of Nanotechnologies in the British Newspaper Press. Science Communication. 2005;27(2):200-220. doi:10.1177/1075547005281472
33.
Bauer MW. Public Perceptions and Mass Media in the Biotechnology Controversy. International Journal of Public Opinion Research. 2005;17(1):5-22. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edh054
34.
Gregory J, Miller S. Science in Public: Communication, Culture, and Credibility. Persius Books; 2000.
35.
Peters HP. The interaction of journalists and scientific experts: co-operation and conflict between two professional cultures. Media, Culture & Society. 1995;17(1):31-48. doi:10.1177/016344395017001003
36.
Peters HP, Brossard D, de Cheveigne S, et al. Science-Media Interface: It’s Time to Reconsider. Science Communication. 2008;30(2):266-276. doi:10.1177/1075547008324809
37.
Riesch H, Spiegelhalter DJ. Careless pork costs lives: Risk stories from science to press release to media. Health, Risk & Society. 2011;13(1):47-64. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=a9h&AN=58145021&site=ehost-live&scope=site&custid=s1123049
38.
Stocking SH, Holstein LW. Manufacturing doubt: journalists’ roles and the construction of ignorance in a scientific controversy. Public Understanding of Science. 2008;18(1):23-42. doi:10.1177/0963662507079373
39.
Mapping the Field: Specialist science news journalism in the UK national media. http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/jomec/research/researchgroups/riskscienceandhealth/fundedprojects/mappingscience.html
40.
BALSAMO A. Forms of Technological Embodiment: Reading the Body in Contemporary Culture. Body & Society. 1995;1(3-4):215-237. doi:10.1177/1357034X95001003013
41.
Mutton cut up as lamb: Mothers, daughters and cosmetic surgery. Continuum (Mount Lawley, WA). 2004;18:525-539. http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Mutton+cut+up+as+lamb%3A+Mothers%2C+daughters+and+cosmetic+surgery&rft.jtitle=Continuum%3A+Journal+of+Media+and+Cultural+Studies&rft.au=Jones%2C+M&rft.date=2004&rft.eissn=1469-3666&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=525&rft.epage=539&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=CAX0280040001304&paramdict=en-UK
42.
Cosmetic surgery and the televisual makeover: A Foucauldian feminist reading. Feminist media studies. 2007;7:17-32. http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cosmetic+surgery+and+the+televisual+makeover%3A+A+Foucauldian+feminist+reading&rft.jtitle=Feminist+Media+Studies&rft.au=Heyes%2C+C+J&rft.date=2007&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=17&rft.epage=32&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=CAX0300060001996&paramdict=en-UK
43.
Regula Valérie Burri. Doing Distinctions: Boundary Work and Symbolic Capital in Radiology. Social Studies of Science. 2008;38(1):35-62. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25474564?pq-origsite=summon&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
44.
Jones G. Beauty Imagined: A History of the Global Beauty Industry. Oxford University Press; 2010. https://www.dawsonera.com/guard/protected/dawson.jsp?name=https:idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity&dest=http://www.dawsonera.com/depp/reader/protected/external/AbstractView/S9780191573026
45.
Latour B. How to Talk About the Body? the Normative Dimension of Science Studies. Body & Society. 2004;10(2-3):205-229. doi:10.1177/1357034X04042943
46.
Bolter JD. Turing’s Man: Western Culture in the Computer Age. Penguin; 1993.
47.
Agar J. Constant Touch: A Global History of the Mobile Phone. Revised and updated edition. Icon; 2013.
48.
Garcia-Montes JM. Changes in the self resulting from the use of mobile phones. Media, Culture & Society. 2006;28(1):67-82. doi:10.1177/0163443706059287
49.
Hjorth L, Burgess J, Richardson I. Studying Mobile Media: Cultural Technologies, Mobile Communication, and the iPhone. Vol Routledge research in cultural and media studies. Routledge; 2012. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=345860&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
50.
Latour B. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Harvard University Press; 1987.
51.
Latour B. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Vol Clarendon lectures in management studies. Oxford University Press; 2005. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=90516&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
52.
Leyshon M, DiGiovanna S, Holcomb B. Mobile Technologies and Youthful Exploration: Stimulus or Inhibitor? Urban Studies. 2013;50(3):587-605. doi:10.1177/0042098012468897
53.
Licoppe C. What Does Answering the Phone Mean? A Sociology of the Phone Ring and Musical Ringtones. Cultural Sociology. 2011;5(3):367-384. doi:10.1177/1749975510378193
54.
Actor-network theory, technology and medical sociology: An illustrative analysis of the metered dose inhaler. Sociology of health & illness. 1 AD;18:198-219. http://cm7ly9cu9w.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info:sid/summon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Actor-network+theory%2C+technology+and+medical+sociology%3A+An+illustrative+analysis+of+the+metered+dose+inhaler&rft.jtitle=Sociology+of+Health+and+Illness&rft.au=Prout%2C+Alan&rft.date=1996-03-01&rft.issn=0141-9889&rft.eissn=1467-9566&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=198&rft.epage=219&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=126332834&paramdict=en-UK
55.
Thompson L, Cupples J. Seen and not heard? Text messaging and digital sociality. Social & Cultural Geography. 2008;9(1):95-108. doi:10.1080/14649360701789634
56.
Wainwright SP. Epiphanies of embodiment: injury, identity and the balletic body. Qualitative Research. 2004;4(3):311-337. doi:10.1177/1468794104047232
57.
Wajcman J, Bittman M, Brown JE. Families without Borders: Mobile Phones, Connectedness and Work-Home Divisions. Sociology. 2008;42(4):635-652. doi:10.1177/0038038508091620
58.
Devine-Wright P. Beyond NIMBYism: towards an integrated framework for understanding public perceptions of wind energy. Wind Energy. 2005;8(2):125-139. doi:10.1002/we.124
59.
Kasperson RE, Renn O, Slovic P, et al. The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework. Risk Analysis. 1988;8(2):177-187. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x
60.
Lupton D. Risk. Vol Key ideas. 2nd ed. Routledge; 2013. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=485835&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
61.
Lupton D, Tulloch J. ‘Life would be pretty dull without risk’: Voluntary risk-taking and its pleasures. Health, Risk & Society. 2002;4(2):113-124. doi:10.1080/13698570220137015
62.
Renn O. Three decades of risk research: accomplishments and new challenges. Journal of Risk Research. 1998;1(1):49-71. doi:10.1080/136698798377321
63.
Essentials of Risk Theory (SpringerBriefs in Philosophy). Springer; 2013 edition; 2 AD. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Essentials-Risk-Theory-SpringerBriefs-Philosophy/dp/940075454X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1443611624&sr=8-1&keywords=Essentials+of+Risk+Theory
64.
Riesch H, Oltra C, Lis A, Upham P, Pol M. Internet-based public debate of CCS: Lessons from online focus groups in Poland and Spain. Energy Policy. 2013;56:693-702. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.01.029
65.
Stirling A. Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. Talking point on the precautionary principle. EMBO reports. 2007;8(4):309-315. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400953
66.
WYNNE B. Uncertainty and environmental learning 1, 2Reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. Global Environmental Change. 1992;2(2):111-127. doi:10.1016/0959-3780(92)90017-2
67.
Bourdieu P. Photography: A Middle-Brow Art. Polity; 1990.
68.
Attwood F, Campbell V, Hunter IQ, Lockyer S, eds. Controversial Images: Media Representations on the Edge. Palgrave Macmillan; 2013. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=425951&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
69.
Clarke G. The Photograph. Vol Oxford history of art. Oxford University Press; 1997.
70.
Hand M. Ubiquitous Photography. Polity; 2011. http://lib.myilibrary.com/browse/open.asp?id=487274&entityid=https://idp.brunel.ac.uk/entity
71.
Hallman BC, Benbow SMP. Family leisure, family photography and zoos: exploring the emotional geographies of families. Social & Cultural Geography. 2007;8(6):871-888. doi:10.1080/14649360701712636
72.
Larsen J, Sandbye M, eds. Digital Snaps: The New Face of Photography. I.B. Tauris; 2014.
73.
McQuire S. Photography’s afterlife: Documentary images and the operational archive. Journal of Material Culture. 2013;18(3):223-241. doi:10.1177/1359183513489930
74.
Schwarz O. Negotiating Romance in Front of the Lens. Visual Communication. 2010;9(2):151-169. doi:10.1177/1470357210369982
75.
van Dijck J. Digital photography: communication, identity, memory. Visual Communication. 2008;7(1):57-76. doi:10.1177/1470357207084865
76.
Van House NA. Personal photography, digital technologies and the uses of the visual. Visual Studies. 2011;26(2):125-134. doi:10.1080/1472586X.2011.571888
77.
Vivienne S, Burgess J. The remediation of the personal photograph and the politics of self-representation in digital storytelling. Journal of Material Culture. 2013;18(3):279-298. doi:10.1177/1359183513492080
78.
Bell AR. Science as ‘Horrible’: Irreverent Deference in Science Communication. Science as Culture. 2011;20(4):491-512. doi:10.1080/09505431.2011.605921
79.
Miller S. Public understanding of science at the crossroads. Public Understanding of Science. 2001;10(1):115-120. doi:10.1088/0963-6625/10/1/308
80.
Michael Mulkay and G. Nigel Gilbert. Joking Apart: Some Recommendations concerning the Analysis of Scientific Culture. Social Studies of Science. 1982;12(4):585-613. http://www.jstor.org/stable/284829?pq-origsite=summon&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
81.
Pinto B, Marcal D, Vaz SG. Communicating through humour: A project of stand-up comedy about science. Public Understanding of Science. 2015;24(7):776-793. doi:10.1177/0963662513511175
82.
Riesch H. Why did the proton cross the road? Humour and science communication. Public Understanding of Science. 2015;24(7):768-775. doi:10.1177/0963662514546299
83.
Allan S. Media, Risk, and Science. Vol Issues in cultural and media studies. Open University Press; 2002.
84.
Locke S. Fantastically reasonable: ambivalence in the representation of science and        technology in super-hero comics. Public Understanding of Science. 2005;14(1):25-46. doi:10.1177/0963662505048197
85.
Turney J. Frankenstein’s Footsteps: Science, Genetics and Popular Culture. Yale University Press; 1998.
86.
Weingart P, Muhl C, Pansegrau P. Of Power Maniacs and Unethical Geniuses: Science and Scientists in Fiction Film. Public Understanding of Science. 2003;12(3):279-287. doi:10.1177/0963662503123006
87.
VOLUME 10, ISSUE 1 (2012) | Institute for Critical Animal Studies (ICAS). http://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/volume-10-issue-1-2012/
88.
Vialles N. A place that is no place. In: Animal to Edible. Cambridge University Press; 1994:15-28. https://intra.brunel.ac.uk/s/Library/Digital%20Readings/SO2603%20VIALLES%20Place.pdf