1
Beer D. How should we do the history of Big Data? Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716646135
2
Halpern O. Beautiful Data. Duke University Press 2015. doi:10.1215/9780822376323-010
3
Rubio FD, Baert P, editors. Leach, J. (2012) ‘Step inside: knowledge freely available’: The politics of (making) knowledge-objects’. In: The politics of knowledge. London: : Routledge 2012. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781134004386
4
Boellstorff T, Maurer B, editors. Seaver, N. (2015) Bastard Algebra. In: Data, now bigger and better! Chicago: : Prickly Paradigm Press 2015.
5
Annelise Riles. Infinity within the Brackets. American Ethnologist 1998;25:378–98.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/645790?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
6
Latour B. Circulating Reference. In: Pandora’s hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, Mass: : Harvard University Press 1999. 24–79.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=3281174a-6036-e711-80c9-005056af4099
7
Striphas T. Algorithmic culture. European Journal of Cultural Studies 2015;18:395–412. doi:10.1177/1367549415577392
8
Rosenberg D. Data before the fact. In: Gitelman L, ed. ‘Raw data’ is an oxymoron. Cambridge, Massachusetts: : The MIT Press 2013. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/servlet/opac?bknumber=6451327
9
Beer D. Productive measures: Culture and measurement in the context of everyday neoliberalism. Big Data & Society 2015;2. doi:10.1177/2053951715578951
10
Floridi L. A Look into the Future Impact of ICT on Our Lives. The Information Society 2007;23:59–64. doi:10.1080/01972240601059094
11
Verran H. The Changing Lives of Measures and Values: From Centre Stage in the Fading ‘Disciplinary’ Society to Pervasive Background Instrument in the Emergent ‘Control’ Society. The Sociological Review 2011;59:60–72. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02059.x
12
Hacking I. The argument. In: The Taming of Chance. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1990. 1–10.http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511819766
13
Porter TM. Trust in numbers: the pursuit of objectivity in science and public life. Princeton, N.J: : Princeton University Press 1995.
14
Hui Y. What is a Digital Object? Metaphilosophy 2012;43:380–95. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2012.01761.x
15
Halpern O. Cybernetic rationality. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 2014;15:223–38. doi:10.1080/1600910X.2014.923320
16
Halpern O. Beautiful data: a history of vision and reason since 1945. Durham, N.C.: : Duke University Press 2014.
17
Riles A. Introduction: in response. In: Documents: artifacts of modern knowledge. Ann Arbor: : University of Michigan Press 2006. 1–38.
18
Chua L, Salmond A. Artefacts in anthropology. In: The SAGE handbook of social anthropology. Los Angeles: : SAGE 2012. 101–14.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=11445b7c-8636-e711-80c9-005056af4099
19
JIMÉNEZ AC. Relations and disproportions: The labor of scholarship in the knowledge economy. American Ethnologist 2008;35:229–42. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1425.2008.00035.x
20
Gitelman L. ‘Raw data’ is an oxymoron. Cambridge, Mass: : MIT Press 2013. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/bkabstractplus.jsp?bkn=6451327
21
Manovich L. Database as Symbolic Form. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 1999;5:80–99. doi:10.1177/135485659900500206
22
Elizabeth A. Povinelli. The Woman on the Other Side of the Wall: Archiving the Otherwise in Postcolonial Digital Archives. Differences: A Journal Of Feminist Cultural Studies 2011;22:146–71. doi:10.1215/10407391-1218274
23
Hogan M. Data flows and water woes: The Utah Data Center. Big Data & Society 2015;2. doi:10.1177/2053951715592429
24
Dourish, P. (2014) No SQL: The Shifting Materialities of Databases. Computational Culture: a Journal of Software Studies. Issue 4. http://computationalculture.net/article/no-sql-the-shifting-materialities-of-database-technology
25
Geismar H, Mohns W. Social relationships and digital relationships: rethinking the database at the Vanuatu Cultural Centre. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2011;17:S133–55. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9655.2011.01693.x
26
Velkova J. Data that warms: Waste heat, infrastructural convergence and the computation traffic commodity. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716684144
27
Bowker G. Databasing the world: Biodiversity and the 2000s. In: Memory practices in the sciences. Cambridge, Mass: : MIT Press 2005. 107–36.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=4bbefe35-4f36-e711-80c9-005056af4099
28
Harvey P. The Topological Quality of Infrastructural Relation: An Ethnographic Approach. Theory, Culture & Society 2012;29:76–92. doi:10.1177/0263276412448827
29
To the Cloud: Big Data in a Turbulent World. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews 2015;44:436–7. doi:10.1177/0094306115579192c
30
Bowker GC, Star SL. Sorting things out: classification and its consequences. Cambridge, Mass: : MIT Press 1999. http://cognet.mit.edu/book/sorting-things-out
31
J. Holt, Patrick Vondereau. Where the Internet Lives: Data Centers as Cloud Infrastructure. In: Traffic signal timing manual. [Washington, D.C.]: : U.S. Department of Transportation 2014. http://app.knovel.com/hotlink/toc/id:kpTSTMPNF2/traffic_signal_timing_manual_publication_no_fhwahop08024
32
Salmond AJM. Transforming translations (part I). HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2013;3. doi:10.14318/hau3.3.002
33
Chun WHK. The Enduring Ephemeral, or the Future Is a Memory. Critical Inquiry 2008;35:148–71. doi:10.1086/595632
34
Fuller M, Goffey A. Digital Infrastructures and the Machinery of Topological Abstraction. Theory, Culture & Society 2012;29:311–33. doi:10.1177/0263276412450466
35
Haraway D. Chapter 4: Gene. In: Modest₋Witness@Second₋Millennium.FemaleMan₋Meets₋OncoMouse: feminism and technoscience. New York: : Routledge 1997.
36
Verran H. On assemblage. Journal of Cultural Economy 2009;2:169–82. doi:10.1080/17530350903064188
37
Mackenzie A. Multiplying numbers differently: an epidemiology of contagious convolution. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 2014;15:189–207. doi:10.1080/1600910X.2014.922110
38
Strathern M, University of Cambridge. Department of Social Anthropology. The relation: issues in complexity and scale. Cambridge, U.K.: : Prickly Pear Press 1995.
39
Jensen CB, Morita A. Infrastructures as Ontological Experiments. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 2015;1:81–7.http://estsjournal.org/article/view/21
40
Laidlaw J. A free gift makes no friends. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2000;6:617–34. doi:10.1111/1467-9655.00036
41
Tsing, Anna. Sorting out commodities: How capitalist value is made through gifts. HAU : Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2013;3:21–43.https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/docview/1850088542?rfr_id=info%3Axri%2Fsid%3Aprimo
42
John NA. Sharing and Web 2.0: The emergence of a keyword. New Media & Society 2013;15:167–82. doi:10.1177/1461444812450684
43
Maurer, W.M. Principles of Alliance and Descent for Big Data. Prickly Paradigm Press/University of Chicago 2015. 67–86.http://escholarship.org/uc/item/41r1s161
44
Van Dijck J, Poell T. Understanding the promises and premises of online health platforms. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716654173
45
S. Day, C. Lury. Biosensing: Tracking Persons. In: Quantified:Biosensing Technologies in Everyday Life. MIT Press 2016. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/xpl/ebooks/bookPdfWithBanner.jsp?fileName=7580073.pdf&bkn=7580015&pdfType=chapter
46
After Kinship by Janet Carsten. https://www-cambridge-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/core/books/after-kinship/BF660970EC79E6A4847E76A38CBE1DB9
47
Weiner AB. Reconfiguring Exchange Theory: The Maori Hau. In: Inalienable possessions: the paradox of keeping-while-giving. Berkeley: : University of California Press 1992.
48
Leonelli S. Why the Current Insistence on Open Access to Scientific Data? Big Data, Knowledge Production, and the Political Economy of Contemporary Biology. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 2013;33:6–11. doi:10.1177/0270467613496768
49
Richardson, Sarah S. ; Stevens, Hallam. Fortun, M. (2015) What Toll Pursuit: Affective Assemblages in Genomics and Postgenomics. In: Postgenomics: Perspectives on Biology after the Genome.http://ucl-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?frbrVersion=4&tabs=detailsTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=TN_dawson9780822375449&indx=2&recIds=TN_dawson9780822375449&recIdxs=1&elementId=1&renderMode=poppedOut&displayMode=full&frbrVersion=4&frbg=&&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A%28UCL%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe&tb=t&mode=Basic&vid=UCL_VU1&srt=rank&tab=local&dum=true&vl(freeText0)=Postgenomics%3A%20Perspectives%20on%20Biology%20After%20the%20Genome&dstmp=1471430773987
50
Biagioli M. Rights or rewards? Changing frameworks of scientific authorship. In: Scientific authorship: credit and intellectual property in science. New York: : Routledge 2013. 253–81.http://www.tandfebooks.com/ISBN/9780203954270
51
Weiner AB. Inalienable possessions: The forgotten dimension. In: Inalienable possessions: the paradox of keeping-while-giving. Berkeley: : University of California Press 1992. 23–43.https://contentstore.cla.co.uk//secure/link?id=7cf9c98c-5836-e711-80c9-005056af4099
52
Hilgartner S. Selective flows of knowledge in technoscientific interaction: information control in genome research. The British Journal for the History of Science 2012;45:267–80. doi:10.1017/S0007087412000106
53
Kelty CM. This is not an article: Model organism newsletters and the question of ‘open science’. BioSocieties 2012;7:140–68. doi:10.1057/biosoc.2012.8
54
Hirsch E, Strathern M. Transactions and creations: property debates and the stimulus of Melanesia. New York: : Berghahn Books 2004. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv287skdk
55
Leach J. The Self of the Scientist, Material for the Artist: Emergent Distinctionsin an Interdisciplinary Collaboration. Social Analysis 2011;55. doi:10.3167/sa.2011.550308
56
Lezaun J, Montgomery CM. The Pharmaceutical Commons: Sharing and Exclusion in Global Health Drug Development. Science, Technology & Human Values 2015;40:3–29. doi:10.1177/0162243914542349
57
D. Miller. Alienable Gifts and Inalienable Commodities. In: The empire of things: regimes of value and material culture. Santa Fe, N.M.: : School of American Research Press 2001.
58
Gregg M. The Gift That Is Not Given. In: Boellstorff T, Maurer B, eds. Data, now bigger and better! Chicago: : Prickly Paradigm Press 2015.
59
Dalsgaard S, Nielsen M. Introduction: Time and the Field. Social Analysis 2013;57:1–19. doi:10.3167/sa.2013.570101
60
Biagioli M. Between Knowledge And Technology: Patenting Methods, Rethinking Materiality. Anthropological Forum 2012;22:285–99. doi:10.1080/00664677.2012.724009
61
Strathern M. The Patent and the Malanggan. Theory, Culture & Society 2001;18:1–26. doi:10.1177/02632760122051850
62
Brown D, Nicholas G. Protecting indigenous cultural property in the age of digital democracy: Institutional and communal responses to Canadian First Nations and Maori heritage concerns. Journal of Material Culture 2012;17:307–24. doi:10.1177/1359183512454065
63
Gregory CA. Gifts and commodities. London: : Academic Press 1982.
64
Maurer B. Late to the party: debt and data. Social Anthropology 2012;20:474–81. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8676.2012.00219.x
65
Strathern M. Externalities in comparative guise. Economy and Society 2002;31:250–67. doi:10.1080/03085140220123153
66
Rosemary J. Coombe and Andrew Herman. Rhetorical Virtues: Property, Speech, and the Commons on the World-Wide Web. Anthropological Quarterly 2004;77:559–74.http://www.jstor.org/stable/3318236
67
Annette B. Weiner. Inalienable Wealth. American Ethnologist 1985;12:210–27.http://www.jstor.org/stable/644217?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
68
Walford A. Data Moves: Taking Amazonian Climate Science Seriously. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology 2012;30. doi:10.3167/ca.2012.300207
69
Brine KR, Poovey M. From Measuring Desire to Quantifying Expectations: A Late Nineteenth- Century Effort to Marry Economic Theory and Data. In: ‘Raw data’ is an oxymoron. Cambridge, Mass: : MIT Press 2013. https://ieeexplore-ieee-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/servlet/opac?bknumber=6451327
70
Helmond A. ‘Raw data’ is an oxymoron. Information, Communication & Society 2014;17:1171–3. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2014.920042
71
Arturo Escobar. After Nature Steps to an Antiessentialist Political Ecology. Current Anthropology 1999;40:1–30.http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/515799?sid=primo&origin=crossref&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
72
Büscher B. Nature 2.0: Exploring and theorizing the links between new media and nature conservation. New Media & Society 2016;18:726–43. doi:10.1177/1461444814545841
73
Asdal K. Enacting things through numbers: Taking nature into account/ing. Geoforum 2008;39:123–32. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2006.11.004
74
Kim Fortun. From Bhopal to the Informating of Environmentalism: Risk Communication in Historical Perspective. Osiris 2004;19:283–96.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/3655245?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
75
Gabrys J, Pritchard H, Barratt B. Just good enough data: Figuring data citizenships through air pollution sensing and data stories. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716679677
76
Whitington J. Carbon as a Metric of the Human. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review 2016;39:46–63. doi:10.1111/plar.12130
77
Büscher B. Nature 2.0. Geoforum 2013;44:1–3. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2012.08.004
78
Nadim T. Blind regards: Troubling data and their sentinels. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716666301
79
Garnett E. Developing a feeling for error: Practices of monitoring and modelling air pollution data. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716658061
80
Fortun K, Poirier L, Morgan A, et al. Pushback: Critical data designers and pollution politics. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716668903
81
Dalsgaard S. The commensurability of carbon. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2013;3:80–98. doi:10.14318/hau3.1.006
82
Grebowicz M. Glacial Time and Lonely Crowds:The social effects of climate change as internet spectacle. Environmental Humanities 2014;5:1–11.https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-3615388
83
Stefan Helmreich. From Spaceship Earth to Google Ocean: Planetary Icons, Indexes, and Infrastructures. Social Research 2011;78:1211–42.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/23349849?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
84
McNally R, Mackenzie A, Hui A, et al. Understanding the ‘Intensive’ in ‘Data Intensive Research’: Data Flows in Next Generation Sequencing and Environmental Networked Sensors. International Journal of Digital Curation 2012;7:81–94. doi:10.2218/ijdc.v7i1.216
85
Gabrys J. Program earth: environmental sensing technology and the making of a computational planet. Minneapolis: : University of Minnesota Press 2016. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctt1b7x5gq
86
Lippert I. Environment as datascape: Enacting emission realities in corporate carbon accounting. Geoforum 2015;66:126–35. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.09.009
87
Verran H. Number as Generative Device. In: Lury C, Wakeford N, eds. Inventive methods: the happening of the social. Abingdon: : Routledge 2014.
88
Knox H. Carbon, Convertibility, and the Technopolitics of Oil. In: Appel H, Mason A, Watts M, eds. Subterranean estates: life worlds of oil and gas. Ithaca: : Cornell University Press 2015. https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=alma9931090819204761&context=L&vid=44UCL_INST:UCL_VU2&lang=en&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&isFrbr=true&tab=Everything&query=any,contains,990022437450204761&sortby=date_d&facet=frbrgroupid,include,9022657445453213247&offset=0
89
Richard Maxwell ; Jon Raundand Nina Lager Vestberg. Gabrys, J. (2015) Powering Ecologies: From Energy Ecologies to Electronic Environmentalism. In: Media and the Ecological Crisis: Routledge research in cultural and media studies 67.
90
Sabina Leonelli. What Counts as Scientific Data? A Relational Framework. Philosophy of Science 2015;82:810–21.http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/684083?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
91
Shackley S, Wynne B. Representing Uncertainty in Global Climate Change Science and Policy: Boundary-Ordering Devices and Authority. Science, Technology & Human Values 1996;21:275–302. doi:10.1177/016224399602100302
92
Fairhead J, Leach M, Scoones I. Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature? Journal of Peasant Studies 2012;39:237–61. doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.671770
93
Lehning M, Dawes N, Bavay et. al. M. Instrumenting the earth: Next-generation sensor networks and environmental science. In: The fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery. Redmond, Wash: : Microsoft Research 45–51.
94
Helmreich S. Blue-green Capital, Biotechnological Circulation and an Oceanic Imaginary: A Critique of Biopolitical Economy. BioSocieties 2007;2:287–302. doi:10.1017/S1745855207005753
95
Igoe J. The spectacle of nature in the global economy of appearances: Anthropological engagements with the spectacular mediations of transnational conservation. Critique of Anthropology 2010;30:375–97. doi:10.1177/0308275X10372468
96
Franklin S. Re-thinking nature-culture: Anthropology and the new genetics. Anthropological Theory 2003;3:65–85. doi:10.1177/1463499603003001752
97
Rapp R. Big data, small kids: Medico-scientific, familial and advocacy visions of human brains. BioSocieties Published Online First: 26 October 2015. doi:10.1057/biosoc.2015.33
98
Lupton D. Quantifying the body: monitoring and measuring health in the age of mHealth technologies. Critical Public Health 2013;23:393–403. doi:10.1080/09581596.2013.794931
99
Greenfield, D. (2016) Deep Data: Notes on the n of 1. In ‘Quantified: biosensing technologies in everyday life’ ed. Dawn Nafus. MIT Press. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/xpl/ebooks/bookPdfWithBanner.jsp?fileName=7580296.pdf&bkn=7580015&pdfType=chapter
100
Emily Martin. The End of the Body? American Ethnologist 1992;19:121–40.http://www.jstor.org/stable/644828?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
101
Tutton R, Prainsack B. Enterprising or altruistic selves? Making up research subjects in genetics research. Sociology of Health & Illness 2011;33:1081–95. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9566.2011.01348.x
102
Ruckenstein M. Visualized and Interacted Life: Personal Analytics and Engagements with Data Doubles. Societies 2014;4:68–84. doi:10.3390/soc4010068
103
After Kinship by Janet Carsten. https://www-cambridge-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/core/books/after-kinship/BF660970EC79E6A4847E76A38CBE1DB9
104
Sharp LA. The Commodification of the Body and its Parts. Annual Review of Anthropology 2000;29:287–328. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.29.1.287
105
Thacker E. What is Biomedia? Configurations 2003;11:47–79. doi:10.1353/con.2004.0014
106
Beaulieu A. From brainbank to database: the informational turn in the study of the brain. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 2004;35:367–90. doi:10.1016/j.shpsc.2004.03.011
107
Singer N. From knowing yourself to prodding yourself. The New York Times 2015.
108
Strathern M. After nature: English kinship in the late twentieth century. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 1992.
109
Lupton D. The commodification of patient opinion: the digital patient experience economy in the age of big data. Sociology of Health & Illness 2014;36:856–69. doi:10.1111/1467-9566.12109
110
Franklin S. Biologization Re-visited: Kinship Theory. In: Relative values: reconfiguring kinship studies. Durham [N.C.]: : Duke University Press 2001. 302–25.https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=alma9931045211204761&context=L&vid=44UCL_INST:UCL_VU2&lang=en&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&adaptor=Local%20Search%20Engine&isFrbr=true&tab=Everything&query=any,contains,Relative%20values:%20reconfiguring%20kinship%20studies&sortby=date_d&facet=frbrgroupid,include,61215140135456524&offset=0
111
Helmreich S. Kinship in Hypertext. In: Relative values: reconfiguring kinship studies. Durham, N.C.: : Duke University Press 2002. 116–43.http://www.vlebooks.com/vleweb/product/openreader?id=UCL&isbn=9780822383222
112
Dawn Nafus. Big Data, Big Questions - This One Does Not Go Up To 11: The Quantified Self Movement as an Alternative Big Data Practice. International Journal of Communication 2014;8.http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2170
113
Fujimara J. The Practice of Producing Meaning in Bioinformatics. In: The practices of human genetics. Dordrecht: : Kluwer Academic 1999. 49–87.
114
Rabinow P. Essays on the anthropology of reason. Princeton, N.J: : Princeton University Press 1996.
115
Gross A. The economy of social data: exploring research ethics as device. The Sociological Review 2011;59:113–29. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02055.x
116
Van Dijck J. Digital cadavers: the visible human project as anatomical theater. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 2000;31:271–85. doi:10.1016/S1369-8486(99)00020-5
117
Gerlitz C, Lury C. Social media and self-evaluating assemblages: on numbers, orderings and values. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 2014;15:174–88. doi:10.1080/1600910X.2014.920267
118
Kaufmann M. Resilience 2.0: social media use and (self-)care during the 2011 Norway attacks. Media, Culture & Society 2015;37:972–87. doi:10.1177/0163443715584101
119
Nafus D. Stuck data, dead data, and disloyal data: the stops and starts in making numbers into social practices. Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 2014;15:208–22. doi:10.1080/1600910X.2014.920266
120
Strathern M. Chapter 5: Losing (out on) Intellectual Resources. In: Kinship, Law and the Unexpected: Relatives are Always a Surprise. Cambridge: : Cambridge University Press 2005. 111–34.http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614514
121
Steinmetz G. Mitchell, T. (1999) Society, Economy and the State Effect. In State/Culture: State Formation after the Cultural Turn. In: State/culture: state-formation after the cultural turn. Ithaca, N.Y.: : Cornell University Press 1999. https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=14616198260004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
122
Amoore L. Biometric borders: Governing mobilities in the war on terror. Political Geography 2006;25:336–51. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2006.02.001
123
Browne S. Dark Matters. Duke University Press 2015. doi:10.1215/9780822375302
124
The World of Indicators edited by Richard Rottenburg. https://www-cambridge-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/core/books/world-of-indicators/C7903E69E0329A256EF02C3CB5C918ED
125
Birchall C. Shareveillance: Subjectivity between open and closed data. Big Data & Society 2016;3. doi:10.1177/2053951716663965
126
Adams V. Metrics. Duke University Press 2016. doi:10.1215/9780822374480
127
D. Haggerty, Richard V. Ericson K. The surveillant assemblage. British Journal of Sociology 2000;51:605–22. doi:10.1080/00071310020015280
128
Sharma A, Gupta A. Sharma, A. and Gupta, A. (2006) Introduction: Re-thinking Theories of the State in an Age of Globalization. In: The anthropology of the state: a reader. Malden, Mass: : Blackwell 2006.
129
Universitetet i Oslo. State formation: anthropological perspectives. London: : Pluto Press 2005. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt18fs5n7
130
Isin, E and Ruppert E (2017) Citizen Snowden. International Journal of Communication 11 843-857. http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/5642/1934
131
Kirstie Ball ; Kevin D. Haggend David Lyon. Bruno, Fernanda. (2012) Surveillance and Participation on Web 2.0. In: Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies. doi:10.4324/9780203814949
132
Isin, E and Ruppert E (2017) Citizen Snowden. International Journal of Communication 11 843-857. http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/viewFile/5642/1934
133
Cheney-Lippold J. A New Algorithmic Identity. Theory, Culture & Society 2011;28:164–81. doi:10.1177/0263276411424420
134
Roderick L. Discipline and Power in the Digital Age: The Case of the US Consumer Data Broker Industry. Critical Sociology 2014;40:729–46. doi:10.1177/0896920513501350
135
Ruppert E. Population Objects: Interpassive Subjects. Sociology 2011;45:218–33. doi:10.1177/0038038510394027
136
M’charek A, Schramm K, Skinner D. Topologies of Race. Science, Technology, & Human Values 2014;39:468–87. doi:10.1177/0162243913509493
137
Gilles Deleuze. Postscript on the Societies of Control. October 1992;59:3–7.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/778828?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
138
Ruppert E, Savage M. Transactional politics. The Sociological Review 2011;59:73–92. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.2012.02057.x
139
Nafus, D ; Sherman, J. This One Does Not Go Up to 11: The Quantified Self Movement as an Alternative Big Data Practice. http://ucl-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/primo_library/libweb/action/display.do?tabs=detailsTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=TN_wos000349010500023&indx=1&recIds=TN_wos000349010500023&recIdxs=0&elementId=0&renderMode=poppedOut&displayMode=full&frbrVersion=&frbg=&&dscnt=0&scp.scps=scope%3A%28UCL%29%2Cprimo_central_multiple_fe&tb=t&mode=Basic&vid=UCL_VU1&srt=rank&tab=local&dum=true&vl(freeText0)=%20Nafus%2C%20D.%20and%20J.%20Sherman%20%282014%29%20This%20One%20Does%20Not%20Go%20Up%20to%20Eleven%3A%20The%20Quantifed%20Self%20Movement%20as%20an%20Alternative%20Big%20Data%20Practice.%20International%20Journal%20of%20Communication%2C%20Vol%208.&dstmp=1471435285056
140
Lyon D. Surveillance, Snowden, and Big Data: Capacities, consequences, critique. Big Data & Society 2014;1. doi:10.1177/2053951714541861
141
LYON D. BIOMETRICS, IDENTIFICATION AND SURVEILLANCE. Bioethics 2008;22:499–508. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00697.x
142
Evelyn Ruppert. Population Objects: Interpassive Subjects. Sociology 2011;45:218–33.http://www.jstor.org/stable/42857535?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
143
Lupton D. Self-tracking modes: relflexive self-monitoring and data practices. Social life of big data symposium 2nd June 2015. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2483549
144
Fuller M, Goffey A. Leak early, leak often. In: Evil media. Cambridge, Massachusetts: : The MIT Press 2012. 100–4.https://ucl.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/view/action/uresolver.do?operation=resolveService&package_service_id=15040989580004761&institutionId=4761&customerId=4760&VE=true
145
Vertesi J. My Experiment Opting Out of Big Data Made Me Look Like a Criminal. Time.com 2014;:1–1.http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,shib&db=bth&AN=95911990&site=ehost-live&scope=site
146
Amoore L. Data Derivatives: On the Emergence of a Security Risk Calculus for Our Times. Theory, Culture & Society 2011;28:24–43. doi:10.1177/0263276411417430
147
Strathern M. Parts and wholes: refiguring relationships in a post-plural world. In: Conceptualizing society. London: : Routledge 1992. 75–106.http://www.tandfebooks.com/ISBN/9780203032244
148
Ruppert E. The Governmental Topologies of Database Devices. Theory, Culture & Society 2012;29:116–36. doi:10.1177/0263276412439428
149
Lyon D. Biometrics, Identification and Surveillance. Bioethics 2008;22:499–508. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8519.2008.00697.x
150
Lyon D. Liquid Surveillance: The Contribution of Zygmunt Bauman to Surveillance Studies1. International Political Sociology 2010;4:325–38. doi:10.1111/j.1749-5687.2010.00109.x
151
Anna Tsing. The Global Situation. Cultural Anthropology 2000;15:327–60.http://www.jstor.org/stable/656606?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
152
Coopmans C. Visual analytics as artful revelation. In: Coopmans C, ed. Representation in scientific practice revisited. Cambridge, Massachusetts: : The MIT Press 2014. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt9qf5hv.6?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
153
The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete | WIRED. https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/
154
Latour B, Jensen P, Venturini T, et al. ‘The whole is always smaller than its parts’ - a digital test of Gabriel Tardes’ monads. The British Journal of Sociology 2012;63:590–615. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2012.01428.x
155
Lake RW. Big Data, urban governance, and the ontological politics of hyperindividualism. Big Data & Society 2017;4. doi:10.1177/2053951716682537
156
Annelise Riles. Infinity within the Brackets. American Ethnologist 1998;25:378–98.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/645790?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
157
boyd danah, Crawford K. CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA. Information, Communication & Society 2012;15:662–79. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
158
Seaver N. The nice thing about context is that everyone has it. Media, Culture & Society 2015;37:1101–9. doi:10.1177/0163443715594102
159
MARILYN STRATHERN. VIRTUAL SOCIETY? GET REAL! Ashridge 4–5 May 2000: Conference of the ‘Virtual Society?: the Social Science of Electronic Technologies’ Programme: Abstraction and decontextualisation: an anthropological comment. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology 2001;22:52–66.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/23820353?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
160
Boellstorff T, Maurer B, editors. Boellstorff, T. (2015) Making Big Data,. In: Data, now bigger and better! Chicago: : Prickly Paradigm Press 2015.
161
Abramson, Allen. (2016) What in/is the world in/of Big Data? Theorizing the Contemporary, Cultural Anthropology. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/833-what-in-is-the-world-is-of-big-data
162
Breiger RL. Scaling down. Big Data & Society 2015;2. doi:10.1177/2053951715602497
163
Kitchin R. Big Data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data & Society 2014;1. doi:10.1177/2053951714528481
164
Strathern M. Partial connections. Updated ed. Walnut Creek, CA: : AltaMira Press 2004.
165
Strathern M. Environments within: An ethnographic commentary on scale. In: Culture, landscape, and the environment: the Linacre lectures, 1997. Oxford: : Oxford University Press 2000. 44–71.
166
Strathern M. On Space and Depth. In: Complexities: social studies of knowledge practices. Durham: : Duke University Press 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/9780822383550
167
Marr B. The Difference Between Big Data and a Lot of Data. 21AD.http://data-informed.com/
168
Marcus G. Holism and the Expectations of Critique in Post-1980s Anthropology; Notes and Queries, and an Epilogue. In: Experiments in holism: theory and practice in contemporary anthropology. Chichester, West Sussex: : Wiley-Blackwell 2010. 28–46.http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781444324426
169
Couldry N, Powell A. Big Data from the bottom up. Big Data & Society 2014;1. doi:10.1177/2053951714539277
170
Lash S. Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation? Theory, Culture & Society 2007;24:55–78. doi:10.1177/0263276407075956
171
Bowker GC. The Theory/Data Thing. International Journal of Communication 2014;8.http://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2190
172
Beer D, Burrows R. Popular Culture, Digital Archives and the New Social Life of Data. Theory, Culture & Society 2013;30:47–71. doi:10.1177/0263276413476542
173
Riles A. The network inside out: Annelise Riles. Ann Arbor: : University of Michigan Press 2001.
174
Wendy F. Hsu. Hsu, W.F (2016) A Performative Digital Ethnography. In ‘The Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography’ eds. Hjorth, Horst, Galloway, Bell. Routledge. Published Online First: 2016. doi:10.4324/9781315673974.ch4
175
Seaver N. Algorithms as culture: Some tactics for the ethnography of algorithmic systems. Big Data & Society 2017;4. doi:10.1177/2053951717738104
176
Mackenzie A. These Things Called Systems. Social Studies of Science 2003;33:365–87. doi:10.1177/03063127030333003
177
Candea M. Arbitrary locations: in defence of the bounded field-site. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 2007;13:167–84. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9655.2007.00419.x
178
Marcus GE. Ethnography in/of the World System: The Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology 1995;24:95–117. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.24.100195.000523
179
Boellstorff T. Rethinking Digital Anthropology. In: Digital anthropology. London: : Berg 2012. https://www.dawsonera.com/guard/protected/dawson.jsp?name=https://shib-idp.ucl.ac.uk/shibboleth&dest=http://www.dawsonera.com/depp/reader/protected/external/AbstractView/S9780857852922
180
Jackson Jr. JL. Ethnography is, ethnography ain’t. Cultural Anthropology;27:480–97. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1360.2012.01155.x
181
Strathern M. Chapter 1. In: Property, substance and effect: anthropological essays on persons and things. London: : Athlone 1999.
182
Kelty C, Coleman G, Strassler K. Commentary and Discussion on the Digital Form Curated Collection. Curated Collections, Cultural Anthropology Online. 2012.http://www.culanth.org/curated_collections/8-the-digital-form/discussions/15-commentary-and-discussion-on-the-digital-form-curated-collection
183
George E. Marcus and Marcelo Pisarro. The End(s) of Ethnography: Social/Cultural Anthropology’s Signature Form of Producing Knowledge in Transition. Cultural Anthropology 2008;23:1–14.http://www.jstor.org/stable/20484493?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
184
MARCUS GE. THE LEGACIES OF WRITING CULTURE AND THE NEAR FUTURE OF THE ETHNOGRAPHIC FORM: A Sketch. Cultural Anthropology 2012;27:427–45. doi:10.1111/j.1548-1360.2012.01152.x
185
Marilyn Strathern. Virtual society? Get real! Ashridge 4–5 May 2000: Conference of the ‘Virtual Society?: the Social Science of Electronic Technologies’ Programme: Abstraction and decontextualisation: an anthropological comment. The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology 2001;22:52–66.http://www.jstor.org/stable/23820353?seq=8#page_scan_tab_contents
186
Strathern M. The Limits of Auto-anthropology. In: Anthropology at home. London: : Tavistock Publications 1987. 16–37.
187
Underberg NM, Zorn E. Exploring Peruvian Culture through Multimedia Ethnography. Visual Anthropology 2013;26:1–17. doi:10.1080/08949468.2013.734760
188
Faubion JD, Marcus GE. Fieldwork is not what it used to be: learning anthropology’s method in a time of transition. Ithaca: : Cornell University Press 2009.
189
Marres N, Weltevrede E. Scraping the social? Journal of Cultural Economy 2013;6:313–35. doi:10.1080/17530350.2013.772070
190
Blok A, Pedersen MA. Complementary social science? Quali-quantitative experiments in a Big Data world. Big Data & Society 2014;1. doi:10.1177/2053951714543908
191
Anderson K, Nafus D, Rattenbury T, et al. Numbers Have Qualities Too: Experiences with Ethno-Mining. Ethnographic Praxis in Industry Conference Proceedings 2009;2009:123–40. doi:10.1111/j.1559-8918.2009.tb00133.x
192
Why Big Data Needs Thick Data – Ethnography Matters – Medium. https://medium.com/ethnography-matters/why-big-data-needs-thick-data-b4b3e75e3d7
193
Mike Savage and Roger Burrows. The Coming Crisis of Empirical Sociology. Sociology 2007;41:885–99.http://www.jstor.org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/stable/42858273?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
194
Nafus D. Data, Data, Everywhere, but Who Gets to Interpret It? | EPIC. EPIC. 2015.https://www.epicpeople.org/data-data-everywhere/
195
Ruppert E, Law J, Savage M. Reassembling Social Science Methods: The Challenge of Digital Devices. Theory, Culture & Society 2013;30:22–46. doi:10.1177/0263276413484941
196
Ford H. Big Data and Small: Collaborations between ethnographers and data scientists. Big Data & Society 2014;1. doi:10.1177/2053951714544337
197
» Abildegaard et al (2017) Five recent play dates - EASST. https://easst.net/article/five-recent-play-dates/
198
Publications | Sciences Po | MedialabSciences Po | Medialab. http://www.medialab.sciences-po.fr/publication/
