The Human and Social Factors of Technological Innovations

Risks And Resources Analysis Model

Autores

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.i7.98322

Palavras-chave:

innovation

Resumo

The theoretical article is devoted to the human and social factors of innovations. This is due to the fact that innovation is an increasing and inevitable trend of our time, with deep impacts on society, on nature and on individuals. At the same time, innovations are related to the area of large economic risks and have quite pronounced contradictions, including in the psychological context. The article reveals the basics of studying the psychological context of innovation and the main risks associated with such a context, drawing attention to the need of developing conceptual approaches to better understand this phenomenon, as well as proper policy frameworks that address innovation under these emerging views. As a result, the author’s model for the analysis of risks and innovation resources is presented. The model includes three levels of analysis: the macro level (socio-cultural and institutional factors), the meso level (company level), and the micro level (a person as a subject, creator and/or consumer of innovations). This approach allows us not to make too sharp distinctions between the social, psychological and economic factors of innovation.

Biografia do Autor

Eduard V. Patrakov, Associate Professor at Ural Federal University

Candidate of Sciences (Pedagogy), Associate Professor, Head of the Educational Laboratory, Ural Federal University, Russia. Human performance & social psychologist. Researcher in the area of human factors in innovations and digital environments.

 

Rafael Dias, State University of Campinas (UNICAMP)

Full Professor at the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP), School of Applied Sciences (FCA), specializing in Science and Technology Studies and Science and Technology Policy.

Rodrigo F. Frogeri, University Center of South of Minas Gerais (UNIS-MG)

Research Productivity Fellow under the FAPEMIG/CNPq agreement. PhD in Information Systems and Knowledge Management. Full member of the Graduate Program in Regional Management and Development at the University Center of Southern Minas (UNISMG).

Lioudmila I. Baturina, Associate Professor at the Russian Technological University (RTU MIREA); Russian State University for Humanities, Russia.

PhD in socio psycho linguistics. Associate professor at the Russian Technological University RTU MIREA, Moscow, Russia. Many years of experience in big multinational companies and public sector

 

Referências

Agnihotri, S., & Shanker, D. R. (2023). Association between cognitive distortions and problematic internet use among students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children and Youth Services Review, 155, 107214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.107214

Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London, England: Sage Publications.

Belk, R. W. (2014). The extended self unbound. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 22(2), 133–134. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679220202

Boudet, H. S. (2019). Public perceptions of and responses to new energy technologies. Nature Energy, 4(6), 446–455. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-019-0399-x

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513

Chernykh, A. S. (2023). Field dependence/independence of school students at different stages of society digitalization: A meta-analysis. Psychology in Education, 5(2), 169–184. https://doi.org/10.33910/2686-9527-2023-5-2-169-184

Christie, N., & Ward, H. (2019). The health and safety risks for people who drive for work in the gig economy. Journal of Transport & Health, 13, 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.02.004

Coccia, M. (2021). Technological innovation. Innovations, 11(I12), 1–6.

De Saille, S. (2015). Innovating innovation policy: The emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2015.1045280

Deineka, O. S., Mel'nik, G. S., Dukhanina, L. N., & Maksimenko, A. A. (2020). Psikhologicheskoe sostoianie obshchestva v usloviiakh infodemii [The psychological state of society in the context of infodemic]. VI Mezhdunarodnaia nauchno-prakticheskaia konferentsiia (VI International Scientific and Practical Conference), 194–197. (In Russian).

Engelbart, D. C. (1962). Augmenting human intellect: A conceptual framework. Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute. https://www.dougengelbart.org/content/view/138

Finch, T., May, C., Mort, M., & Mair, F. (2006). Telemedicine, telecare, and the future patient: Innovation, risk and governance. In A. Webster (Ed.), New technologies in health care: Challenge, change and innovation (p. 87-107). Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fraser, J., & Simkins, B. (2010). Enterprise risk management: Today’s leading research and best practices for tomorrow’s executives. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Frogeri, R. F., Portugal Júnior, P. S., Piurcosky, F. P., Bhardwaj, M., González-Islas, J. C., & Mendizábal, J. C. A. (2021). Social representation of the innovation concept: Cross-country study in Bolivia, Brazil, India, and Mexico. RISUS – Journal on Innovation and Sustainability, 12(4), 144–166. https://doi.org/10.23925/2179-3565.2021v12i4p144-166

Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Global Innovation Index. (2023). Global Innovation Index 2023. Geneva, Switzerland: World Intellectual Property Organization. https://www.wipo.int/web/global-innovation-index/2023/index

Godin, B. (2021). Innovation theology. In B. Godin, G. Gaglio, & D. Vinck (Eds.), Handbook on alternative theories of innovation (p. 11-22). Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789907108.00008

Grunwald, A. (2012). Responsible nanobiotechnology: Philosophy and ethics. Singapore: Pan Stanford Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1201/b12229

Gurieva, S., Mararitsa, L., & Gundelakh, O. (2023). Udalennaya rabota v virtual’nom ofise: izmenenie sotsial’nogo prostranstva rabotnika v organizatsii [Remote work in a virtual office: Changing the social space of an employee in an organization]. Organizational Psychology, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.17323/2312-5942-2023-13-2-230-249

Haidt, J. (2024). The anxious generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness. New York, NY: Penguin Press.

Hardi, I., Ray, S., Attari, M. U. Q., Ali, N., & Idroes, G. M. (2024). Innovation and economic growth in the top five Southeast Asian economies: A decomposition analysis. Ekonomikalia Journal of Economics, 2(1), 1-14.

Heidegger, M. (1927/1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). New York, NY: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1927).

Hooi, L. W., & Chan, A. J. (2024). Do workplace digitalisation and group diversity matter in linking innovative culture to employee engagement? Evidence-based HRM. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-07-2023-0184

Ihde, D. (2022). From Heideggerian industrial gigantism to nanoscale technologies. Foundations of Science, 27(1), 245–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-021-09834-3

Invernizzi, N., & Foladori, G. (2010). Nanotechnology implications for labor. Nanotechnology Law & Business, 7(1), 1-12.

Joshi, D. R., Singh, J. K., & Neupane, U. (2021). Mental health problems and patterns of self-care associated with the use of digital devices among university students. European Journal of Mental Health, 16(2), 146–169. https://doi.org/10.5708/EJMH.16.2021.2.3

Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale Welt, 47(4), 369–381.

Leite, E. M. D. A., Audretsch, D., & Leite, A. (2024). Redefining entrepreneurship: Philosophical insights in a post-individualist era. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 33(2), 239–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/09713557241230155

Love, S., Smith, J., & Dace, P. (2024). The future of work: How AI is redefining roles and workforce dynamics.

Luhmann, N. (1991). Der Begriff Risiko [The concept of risk]. In N. Luhmann, Soziologie des Risikos (pp. 9–40). Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.

MacFarquhar, L. (2018, March 26). The mind-expanding ideas of Andy Clark. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/02/the-mind-expanding-ideas-of-andy-clark

Macnaghten, P. (2020). The making of responsible innovation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108769830

Macnaghten, P., Kearnes, M., & Wynne, B. (2005). Nanotechnology, governance, and public deliberation: What role for the social sciences? Science Communication, 27(2), 268–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547005281531

Markard, J., Bento, N., Kittner, N., & Nuñez-Jimenez, A. (2020). Destined for decline? Examining nuclear energy from a technological innovation systems perspective. Energy Research & Social Science, 67, 101512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101512

Mohammadi, A. (2021). Investigación e Innovación Responsables (RRI): Análisis Cienciométrico: Investigación e Innovación Responsables (RRI): Análisis Cienciométrico. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 6(2), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2021-158

Navarro, J. L., & Tudge, J. R. H. (2023). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: Neo-ecological theory. Current Psychology, 42, 19338–19354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3

Nestik, T., Zhuravlev, A., Patrakov, E., Szabó, C. M., Batourina, L., & Piurcosky, F. (2018). Technofobia as a cultural and psychological phenomenon: Theoretical analysis. Interação, 20(1). http://interacao.unis.edu.br/wp-content/uploads/sites/80/2018/11/13.pdf

Núñez-Gómez, P., Larrañaga, K. P., Rangel, C., & Ortega-Mohedano, F. (2021). Critical analysis of the risks in the use of the internet and social networks in childhood and adolescence. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 683384. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.683384

Obaigbena, A., Lottu, O. A., Ugwuanyi, E. D., Jacks, B. S., Sodiya, E. O., & Daraojimba, O. D. (2024). AI and human-robot interaction: A review of recent advances and challenges. GSC Advanced Research and Reviews, 18(2), 321–330. https://doi.org/10.30574/gscarr.2024.18.2.0465

Owen, R., von Schomberg, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2021). An unfinished journey? Reflections on a decade of responsible research and innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 8(2), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2021.1948789

Patrakov, E. V., & Vodopyanova, N. E. (2024). Tsifrovizatsiya i tsennosti [Digitalisation and values]. Voprosy Psikhologii, 70(3), 16–25. (In Russian).

Patrakov, E. V., Szabo, C. M., Baturina, L. I., Frogeri, R. F., Nestik, T. A., & Campos, F. L. S. (2022). Otnoshenie k tekhnologicheskim innovatsiyam: mezhkul’turnoe issledovanie [Attitudes towards technological innovation: A cross-cultural study]. Psychology in Education, 4(4), 459–474. https://doi.org/10.33910/2686-9527-2022-4-4-459-474 (In Russian).

Payton, T., & Claypoole, T. (2023). Privacy in the age of big data: Recognizing threats, defending your rights, and protecting your family. London, England: Bloomsbury Publishing PLC.

Peters, T. (2014). Playing God? Genetic determinism and human freedom. London, England: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315868719

Piko, B. F., Kiss, H., Hartmann, A., Hamvai, C., & Fitzpatrick, K. M. (2024). The role of social comparison and online social support in social media addiction mediated by self-esteem and loneliness. European Journal of Mental Health, 19, e0019. https://doi.org/10.5708/EJMH.19.2024.0019

Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (2012). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (Anniversary ed., pp. 11–44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Regan, A. (2019). “Smart farming” in Ireland: A risk perception study with key governance actors. NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 90–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2019.100307

Rohman, F. Y., Kumar, R., Ganeshan, S., & G. C., V. K. (2025). The influence of artificial intelligence on information integrity: A media literacy approach for young people. International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 11(6s), 1022–1034.

Schumpeter, J. A. (2004). Economic theory and entrepreneurial history. In J. A. Schumpeter, Essays (pp. 153–271). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Sellars, W. (1962). Philosophy and the scientific image of man. Frontiers of Science and Philosophy, 1, 1–40.

Semenov, A. L. (2020). Rezul’tativnoe obrazovanie rasshirennoj lichnosti v prozrachnom mire na tsifrovoj platforme [Productive education of extended human in the transparent world on digital platform]. The Herzen University Studies: Psychology in Education, 3, 590–596. https://doi.org/10.33910/herzenpsyconf-2020-3-27 (In Russian).

Silverstone, R. (2006). Domesticating domestication: Reflections on the life of a concept. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie, & K. J. Ward (Eds.), Domestication of media and technology (pp. 229–248). Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Stephan, U. (2022). Cross-cultural innovation and entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 9(1), 277–308. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-091209

Stewart, F. (2022). The adolescent as consumer. In Youth policy in the 1990s (pp. 203–226). London, England: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003191024

Van den Hoven, J. (2013). Value sensitive design and responsible innovation. In R. Owen, M. Heintz, & J. Bessant (Eds.), Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society (pp. 75–84). Chichester, England: John Wiley & Sons.

Vayadande, K., Baviskar, A., Avhad, J., Bahadkar, S., Bhalerao, P., & Chimkar, A. (2024). A comprehensive review on navigating the Web 3.0 landscape. In Proceedings of the 2024 Second International Conference on Inventive Computing and Informatics (ICICI).

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410412

Verbeek, P.-P. (2001). Don Ihde: The technological lifeworld (R. P. Crease, Trans.). In H. Achterhuis (Ed.), American philosophy of technology: The empirical turn (pp. 119–146). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Von Schomberg, L., & Blok, V. (2021). The turbulent age of innovation. Synthese, 198(Suppl. 19), 4667–4683. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-019-02374-0

Winner, L. (2018). The cult of innovation: Its myths and rituals. In E. Subrahmanian, T. Odumosu, & J. Tsao (Eds.), Engineering a better future (pp. 87–100). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91134-2_6

Wolf, C. (2021). Public trust and biotech innovation: A theory of trustworthy regulation of (scary!) technology. Social Philosophy and Policy, 38(2), 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052521000081

Zabelina, E., Cruz-Cárdenas, J., Deyneka, O., Maksimenko, A., Guadalupe-Lanas, J., & Ramos-Galarza, C. (2023). Psychological time of green entrepreneurs: A mixed methods study of SMEs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 29(7), 1427–1452. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-06-2022-0533

Zhou, Q. (2021). The impact of cross-cultural adaptation on entrepreneurial psychological factors and innovation ability for new entrepreneurs. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 724544. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.724544

Zhuravlev, A. L., & Nestik, T. A. (2019). Sotsial'no-psikhologicheskie posledstviya vnedreniya novykh tekhnologii: perspektivnye napravleniya issledovanii [Socio-psychological consequences of the introduction of new technologies: Promising areas of research]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal [Psychological Journal], 40(5), 35–47. https://doi.org/10.31857/S020595920006074-7

Downloads

Publicado

2025-12-17

Como Citar

V. Patrakov, E., Dias, R., F. Frogeri, R., & I. Baturina, L. (2025). The Human and Social Factors of Technological Innovations: Risks And Resources Analysis Model. Novation: Critical Studies of Innovation, (7), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.5380/nocsi.i7.98322

Edição

n. 7 (2025): Critical approaches to innovation and alternative policy models for innovation

Seção

Artigos

Licença

Copyright (c) 2025 Eduard V. Patrakov, Rafael de Brito Dias, Rodrigo F. Frogeri, Lioudmila I. Baturina

Creative Commons License

Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

NOvation é uma revista de acesso aberto sob uma licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-CompartilhaIgual 4.0, que permite que outros compartilhem o trabalho com um reconhecimento (e preservação) da autoria e do direito de propriedade intelectual do autor.

Nesta medida, os autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:

1. Autores mantém os direitos e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho publicado sob a Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial-CompartilhaIgual 4.0 que permite [...]

2. Autores têm autorização para distribuição, da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista, em repositório institucional, temático, bases de dados e em outras obras como capítulo de livro, com reconhecimento da autoria e da publicação inicial na revista;

3. Os trabalhos publicados nesta revista serão indexados em bases de dados, repositórios, portais, diretórios e outras fontes em que a revista está e vier a estar indexada.

Responsabilidade ética dos autores

Esta revista está empenhada em manter a integridade do registo científico.

O consentimento para submissão foi recebido explicitamente de todos os coautores, bem como das autoridades responsáveis – tácita ou explicitamente – incluindo o instituto/organização onde o trabalho foi realizado, antes do trabalho ser submetido