IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/teinso/v60y2020ics0160791x19301745.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The blockchain and how it can influence conceptions of the self

Author

Listed:
  • Heister, Stanton
  • Yuthas, Kristi

Abstract

Blockchain technologies are rapidly being developed and tested in a broad range of business and governmental settings. Their unique cryptographic characteristics and configurations enable users of these systems to transact directly and anonymously. The data these users generate are timestamped and immutable. In open blockhains, individual users take responsibility for managing and protecting their own data and for ensuring the reliability of the parties with whom they transact. The socio-material characteristics of these systems will influence user attitudes and behaviors in ways that are profound and difficult to predict. Outcomes have not yet been researched, and the academy has adopted a stance of technological determinism despite the fact that implicit assumptions about outcomes are literally coded in as these systems are developed. We envision potential impacts that may result from self-sovereign ownership of data including: commoditization of the self and relationships with others, the need to police personal data and reputation, and new perceptions of time and history that result from transaction sequentialization and permanence. Further research on the societal impacts of blockchain technologies is needed as these systems become ubiquitous.

Suggested Citation

  • Heister, Stanton & Yuthas, Kristi, 2020. "The blockchain and how it can influence conceptions of the self," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:teinso:v:60:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x19301745
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101218
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X19301745
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101218?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jon Baldwin, 2018. "In digital we trust: Bitcoin discourse, digital currencies, and decentralized network fetishism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Fox, Stephen, 2019. "Addressing the influence of groupthink during ideation concerned with new applications of technology in society," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 86-94.
    3. Misra, Shalini & Stokols, Daniel, 2012. "A typology of people–environment relationships in the Digital Age," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 311-325.
    4. Lammi, Minna & Pantzar, Mika, 2019. "The data economy: How technological change has altered the role of the citizen-consumer," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    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. Chand Bhatt, Priyanka & Kumar, Vimal & Lu, Tzu-Chuen & Daim, Tugrul, 2021. "Technology convergence assessment: Case of blockchain within the IR 4.0 platform," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Hartman, Paul & Ogden, Jeff & Jackson, Ross, 2020. "Contract duration: Barrier or bridge to successful public-private partnerships?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    3. Papanikolaou, Efstathios & Angelis, Jannis & Moustakis, Vassilis, 2023. "Which type of ecosystem for distributed ledger technology?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).

    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. Epting, Shane, 2021. "Vulnerable groups, virtual cities, and social isolation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. von Meduna, Marc & Steinmetz, Fred & Ante, Lennart & Reynolds, Jennifer & Fiedler, Ingo, 2020. "Loot boxes are gambling-like elements in video games with harmful potential: Results from a large-scale population survey," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    3. Hasan, Amena & Nahar, Kamrun & Akhter, Suraiya, 2024. "Cryptocurrency Scams: A Multi-Pronged Approach to Mitigating Risks Through Regulation, Enforcement, and Consumer Education," MPRA Paper 121215, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 31 Jan 2024.
    4. Mingbo Zheng & Gen-Fu Feng & Xinxin Zhao & Chun-Ping Chang, 2023. "The transaction behavior of cryptocurrency and electricity consumption," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Kourtit Karima & Nijkamp Peter & Scholten Henk, 2023. "Planning for Climate–Benign Cities – Design of a Mind Map for Smart Energy Transition," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 61(1), pages 41-61, March.
    6. Yura Yokoyama, 2023. "From money to culture: The practical indeterminacy of Bitcoin's values and temporalities," Economic Anthropology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(1), pages 32-43, January.
    7. Jawad Minhas & Stavros Sindakis, 2022. "Implications of Social Cohesion in Entrepreneurial Collaboration: a Systematic Literature Review," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(4), pages 2760-2791, December.
    8. Won, Jongho & Lee, Daeho & Lee, Junmin, 2023. "Understanding experiences of food-delivery-platform workers under algorithmic management using topic modeling," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    9. Konoplev, D., 2021. "Digital poverty: How online economy captures property inequality," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 138-164.
    10. Rim Krouk & Fernando Almeida, 2021. "Exploring the Impact of COVID-19 in the Sustainability of Airbnb Business Model," Papers 2101.00281, arXiv.org.
    11. Simon Mackenzie, 2022. "Criminology Towards the Metaverse: Cryptocurrency Scams, Grey Economy and the Technosocial," The British Journal of Criminology, Centre for Crime and Justice Studies, vol. 62(6), pages 1537-1552.
    12. Benjamin D. Trump & Emily Wells & Joshua Trump & Igor Linkov, 2018. "Cryptocurrency: governance for what was meant to be ungovernable," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 426-430, September.
    13. Luis Araujo & Katy Mason, 2021. "Markets, infrastructures and infrastructuring markets," AMS Review, Springer;Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 11(3), pages 240-251, December.
    14. da Silva Neto, Victo José & Chiarini, Tulio, 2021. "Technological progress and political systems: Non-institutional digital platforms and political transformation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    15. de Andrés, Pablo & Arroyo, David & Correia, Ricardo & Rezola, Alvaro, 2022. "Challenges of the market for initial coin offerings," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. Juneman Abraham & Dian Utami Sutiksno & Nuning Kurniasih & Ari Warokka, 2019. "Acceptance and Penetration of Bitcoin: The Role of Psychological Distance and National Culture," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, July.
    17. Sharfa Hassan & Puneet Kaur & Michael Muchiri & Chidiebere Ogbonnaya & Amandeep Dhir, 2023. "Unethical Leadership: Review, Synthesis and Directions for Future Research," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(2), pages 511-550, March.
    18. Tabarés, Raúl, 2021. "HTML5 and the evolution of HTML; tracing the origins of digital platforms," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    19. Wu, Lin & Zhang, Fan & Chang, Sun Joseph & Zhang, Zhiguang, 2021. "How do the internet technological developments shift the consumption pattern of paper products? Evidence from China," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    20. Quirós, Cipriano & Portela, Javier & Marín, Raquel, 2021. "Differentiated models in the collaborative transport economy: A mixture analysis for Blablacar and Uber," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).

    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:eee:teinso:v:60:y:2020:i:c:s0160791x19301745. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/technology-in-society .

    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.