Editing Actor–network theory (section)

{{Short description|Theory within social science}}
{{Anthropology}}
'''Actor–network theory''' ('''ANT''') is a theoretical and methodological approach to [[social theory]] where everything in the social and natural worlds exists in constantly shifting networks of relationships. It posits that nothing exists outside those relationships. All the factors involved in a social situation are on the same level, and thus there are no external social forces beyond what and how the network participants interact at present. Thus, objects, ideas, processes, and any other relevant factors are seen as just as important in creating [[social]] situations as humans.

ANT holds that social forces do not exist in themselves, and therefore cannot be used to explain social phenomena.  Instead, strictly empirical analysis should be undertaken to "describe" rather than "explain" social activity.  Only after this can one introduce the concept of social forces, and only as an abstract theoretical concept, not something which genuinely exists in the world.<ref name="RtS">{{Cite book |last=Latour |first=B. |title=Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory |title-link=Bruno Latour#Reassembling the Social |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2005 |isbn=9780199256044 |location=Oxford |pages=238}}</ref>

Although it is best known for its controversial insistence on the capacity of [[non human|nonhumans]] to act or participate in systems or [[Social network|networks]] or both, ANT is also associated with forceful critiques of conventional and [[Critical theory|critical sociology]]. Developed by [[science and technology studies]] (STS) scholars [[Michel Callon]], [[Madeleine Akrich]] and [[Bruno Latour]], the sociologist [[John Law (sociologist)|John Law]], and others, it can more technically be described as a "material-[[Semiotics|semiotic]]" method. This means that it maps relations that are simultaneously material (between things) and [[semiotic]] (between concepts). It assumes that many relations are both material and semiotic. The term actor-network theory was coined by John Law in 1992 to describe the work being done across case studies in different areas at the [[Centre de Sociologie de l'Innovation]] at the time.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Akrich |first=Madeleine |date=2023 |title=Actor Network Theory, Bruno Latour, and the CSI |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/03063127231158102 |journal=Social Studies of Science |language=en |volume=53 |issue=2 |pages=169–173 |doi=10.1177/03063127231158102 |pmid=36840444 |s2cid=257183188 |issn=0306-3127 |quote="It was John Law who, from an inside-outside position, did an important job of synthesizing all the work developed at the CSI at the time taking up the term ANT (Law, 1992), a term whose origin is difficult to trace but which stems from the 'actor-network' used by Michel Callon in his analysis of the electric vehicle."}}</ref>

The theory demonstrates that everything in the social and natural worlds, human and nonhuman, interacts in shifting networks of relationships without any other elements out of the networks. ANT challenges many traditional approaches by defining nonhumans as actors equal to humans. This claim provides a new perspective when applying the theory in practice.

Broadly speaking, ANT is a [[social constructivism|constructivist]] approach in that it avoids [[essentialist]] explanations of events or innovations (i.e. ANT explains a successful theory by understanding the combinations and interactions of elements that make it successful, rather than saying it is true and the others are false).<ref name=EncycANT>Muniesa, F., 2015. "[https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.85001-1 Actor-Network Theory]", in James D. Wright (Ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd Edition, Oxford, Elsevier: vol. 1, 80-84.</ref> Likewise, it is not a cohesive theory in itself. Rather, ANT functions as a strategy that assists people in being sensitive to terms and the often unexplored assumptions underlying them.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mol|first=A.|date=2010|title=Actor-Network Theory: sensitive terms and enduring tensions|url=http://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=75bbc661-0a89-475a-9eef-8c8c5a2e9904|journal=Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. Sonderheft|volume=50}}</ref> It is distinguished from many other [[science and technology studies|STS]] and sociological [[Social network|network theories]] for its distinct material-semiotic approach.