IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v6y2018i2p22-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cybersecurity Research Meets Science and Technology Studies

Author

Listed:
  • Myriam Dunn Cavelty

    (Center for Security Studies, ETH Zürich, Switzerland)

Abstract

This article sets out to show how different understandings of technology as suggested by Science and Technology Studies (STS) help reveal different political facets of cybersecurity. Using cybersecurity research as empirical site, it is shown that two separate ways of understanding cybertechnologies are prevalent in society. The primary one sees cybertechnologies as apolitical, flawed, material objects that need to be fixed in order to create more security; the other understands them as mere political tools in the hands of social actors without considering technological (im)possibilities. This article suggests a focus on a third understanding to bridge the uneasy gap between the two others: technology defined as an embodiment of societal knowledge. The article posits that in line with that, the study of cyberpolitics would benefit from two innovations: a focus on cybersecurity as social practice―enacted and stabilized through the circulation of knowledge about vulnerabilities―and a focus on the practices employed in the discovery, exploitation and removal of those vulnerabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Myriam Dunn Cavelty, 2018. "Cybersecurity Research Meets Science and Technology Studies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 22-30.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:2:p:22-30
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v6i2.1385
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1385
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v6i2.1385?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Gal-Or & Anindya Ghose, 2005. "The Economic Incentives for Sharing Security Information," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 186-208, June.
    2. Philippe Mongeon & Adèle Paul-Hus, 2016. "The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 213-228, January.
    3. Benedikt Lebek & Jörg Uffen & Markus Neumann & Bernd Hohler & Michael H. Breitner, 2014. "Information security awareness and behavior: a theory-based literature review," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 37(12), pages 1049-1092, November.
    4. Éric Archambault & Étienne Vignola-Gagné & Grégoire Côté & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingrasb, 2006. "Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 329-342, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tim Stevens, 2018. "Global Cybersecurity: New Directions in Theory and Methods," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 1-4.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Myriam Dunn Cavelty, 2018. "Cybersecurity Research Meets Science and Technology Studies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 22-30.
    2. Vanessa Sandoval-Romero & Vincent Larivière, 2020. "The national system of researchers in Mexico: implications of publication incentives for researchers in social sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 99-126, January.
    3. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    4. Antoine Archambault & Philippe Mongeon & Vincent Larivière, 2017. "On the effects of the reunification on German researchers’ publication patterns," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(1), pages 337-347, April.
    5. Andreea Mironescu & Alina Moroșanu & Anca-Diana Bibiri, 2023. "The regional dynamics of multilingual publishing in web of science: A statistical analysis of central and eastern european journals and researchers in linguistics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 1133-1162, February.
    6. Zhenglu Yu & Zheng Ma & Haiyan Wang & Jia Jia & Lu Wang, 2020. "Communication value of English-language S&T academic journals in non-native English language countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1389-1402, November.
    7. Amit Kumar Singh & Yifang Zhang & Anu, 2023. "Understanding the Evolution of Environment, Social and Governance Research: Novel Implications From Bibliometric and Network Analysis," Evaluation Review, , vol. 47(2), pages 350-386, April.
    8. Mahdi Khelfaoui & Julien Larrègue & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2020. "Measuring national self-referencing patterns of major science producers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 979-996, May.
    9. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    10. Matthew Harsh & Ravtosh Bal & Alex Weryha & Justin Whatley & Charles C. Onu & Lisa M. Negro, 2021. "Mapping computer science research in Africa: using academic networking sites for assessing research activity," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 305-334, January.
    11. Elmira Janavi & Mohammad Javad Mansourzadeh & Mojgan Samandar Ali Eshtehardi, 2020. "A methodology for developing scientific diversification strategy of countries," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2229-2264, December.
    12. Saïd Echchakoui, 2020. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(3), pages 165-184, September.
    13. Saïd Echchakoui, 0. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    14. Christine Meschede, 2020. "The Sustainable Development Goals in Scientific Literature: A Bibliometric Overview at the Meta-Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-14, June.
    15. Alberto Martín-Martín & Enrique Orduna-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2018. "Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(3), pages 2175-2188, September.
    16. Miguel-Angel Vera-Baceta & Michael Thelwall & Kayvan Kousha, 2019. "Web of Science and Scopus language coverage," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(3), pages 1803-1813, December.
    17. Danielle Lee, 2023. "Bibliometric analysis of Asian ‘language and linguistics’ research: A case of 13 countries," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, December.
    18. Wang, Yuandi & Hu, Ruifeng & Liu, Meijun, 2017. "The geotemporal demographics of academic journals from 1950 to 2013 according to Ulrich’s database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 655-671.
    19. Toluwase Victor Asubiaro & Sodiq Onaolapo, 2023. "A comparative study of the coverage of African journals in Web of Science, Scopus, and CrossRef," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 74(7), pages 745-758, July.
    20. Ho Fai Chan & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Gender differences in performance of top cited scientists by field and country," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(3), pages 2421-2447, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:2:p:22-30. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.