Interview with Eric Meyer
Eric Meyer is a Ph.D. candidate at Indiana University’s School of Library and Information Science. The second recipient of the Rob Kling Social Informatics Fellowship, Eric’s dissertation involves applying a STIN (socio-technical interaction network) strategy to examine social changes that take place when organizations adopt digital photography to replace traditional photography. For more information, visit Eric’s home page at http://mypage.iu.edu/~etmeyer/.
The following email interview was completed on August 28, 2006…
When and how did you first come to know Dr. Kling?
I first met Rob in 1998 when I applied to the Ph.D. program at Indiana University. I got to know him as my advisor, and through several projects I worked on with him. I also took several seminars with Rob.
Can you share with us any interesting anecdotes about Dr. Kling?
Rob was bigger than life. I took his doctoral seminar, which featured a different topic each spring, for three consecutive years. Rob’s lively intelligence was not constrained by a syllabus for these seminars, which could have been titled “What Rob is interested in.” The starting and ending times were highly variable depending on how enthusiastically the discussion was proceeding, and he handed out newly modified syllabi every two or three weeks as the course changed through the term. These seminars were the most valuable classes I’ve ever taken in my life.
Another interesting thing about Rob was his approach to our meetings. I could always tell how interested Rob was in the topics I brought to him. If I had a clunker, he’d greet it with a distracted “Yep, yep, OK, yep,” but then he’d offer a different angle on the subject that he thought might be more productive. As we talked about the new angle and our takes on it, I could always tell when I’d gotten to a place that excited him. If we were in his office, he would light up, turn to his computer, and starting searching for information to help me out. He would send me dozens of e-mails with information as we talked. These meetings would stretch out to 2 or 3 hours, and I’d get back to my computer after the meeting and have a huge pile of e-mails with articles, links, and ideas to work on.
What motivated you to join the doctoral program and study Social Informatics?
I’ve always been interested in the relationship between people and technology. My master’s degree is in anthropology, and I did research looking at how technology changes in the coal mining industry affected minority communities in Appalachia. When I decided to come back to school to work on my Ph.D., I looked into programs that would let me develop these interests in the context of computer technology.
You have been working full-time throughout your doctoral student career. Has it been challenging to split your time between two worlds?
It has slowed me down because I’ve had to work on my degree a little slower than a full-time student might. On the other hand, since my job is in academic research at the School of Medicine where I do data management and analysis for several national research studies, I think it has been somewhat smoother for me than for someone not working in academia. Also, by working in the same job since before I started my Ph.D., I’ve gotten pretty good at juggling everything. I think some people who start a full-time job later in their studies have a more difficult time making the transition.
As indicated on your website http://mypage.iu.edu/~etmeyer/, you are currently working on your dissertation on digital photography usage by marine mammal researchers. What has been most challenging in your dissertation research so far? Can you share with us what you hope or expect to find?
It is an interesting project because I am looking at an under-studied technology (digital photography) in an under-studied domain (wild animal research). Even though there have been many studies of scientists, this research is a new angle. Luckily, I’ve had good response from the marine mammal scientists in allowing me access for interviews and observations of how they use photography in their work with whales, dolphins, seals, manatees, and so forth.
Since this study is exploratory, I hope to describe a new case study in detail as a contribution to our understanding of new technologies. In addition, I am hoping to offer adjustments to Kling’s STIN strategy based on my experience using it in this research.
Instead of using a more standard theory or model, you are planning to incorporate Dr. Kling’s notion of socio-technical interaction networks (STINs). What can you tell us about STINs, why you chose this approach, and what you hope to show?
The STIN strategy was something Rob was developing before he died and really didn’t get a chance to flesh out as well as he would have liked. It is based partially on Latour’s Actor-Network Theory, and provides a way to understand technology as it enters regular use in a population.
The problem with the STIN strategy is that it hasn’t been widely adopted, nor adequately tested. Also, most of the studies that have used STIN so far have used it mainly as a post hoc analytic tool. I’m hoping to offer some additional data on how well using STIN works by designing a project that takes the STIN strategy into account from the beginning and then reflexively examines how much using STIN has helped (or limited) the research process.
What words of wisdom would you like to pass on to others involved in Social Informatics research?
I don’t know that I have that much wisdom to impart. For people thinking of becoming social informatics researchers, though, I think that one of the most exciting things about the field is that it is constantly changing. Social informatics itself is a young area of study, and the technology topics we research are constantly changing and developing. There is an endless supply of new topics!
Where would you like to see the field of Social Informatics go? Are there specific opportunities that should be seized or threats to be dealt with?
There is increasing interest in social informatics both in the U.S. and internationally. The challenge is building on this interest when social informatics is not (nor should it be) a self-contained discipline. Because SI is an interdisciplinary field of study, everyone who self-identifies with social informatics will always have some tension with their obligations to their main disciplines. The worry, of course, is that not enough researchers will embrace the SI point of view to allow creative critical mass that will advance our understanding of people and technology.
In particular, as one of Dr. Kling’s last students, how do you envision continuing Dr. Kling’s legacy?
I do take this responsibility seriously. I don’t slavishly follow everything Rob would have done, but I do think that his approach to scholarship will always color my work. I hope that I can be a productive member of the social informatics community, and continue to be an advocate for SI as an approach to problematizing and understanding relationships between people and their technologies.
Is there anything else you would like to share about Dr. Kling, Social Informatics, or your own research and ideas?
I hope there is more! Check out my website at http://mypage.iu.edu/~etmeyer for more on my research and publications.
Rob Kling was really one of a kind. He had a great mind, and a big heart. I miss him, and am glad to see the Rob Kling Center for Social Informatics continue to grow and to support the kinds of research that Rob worked so enthusiastically to advance.
