Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.advisorPoyraz, Tuğça
dc.contributor.authorÖzuz Dağdelen, Elif
dc.date.accessioned2023-12-26T07:28:22Z
dc.date.issued2023-12-16
dc.date.submitted2023-11-27
dc.identifier.citationAkgüç, Ö. (2004). Mahremiyet açısından elektronik gözetim ve denetim: Tüketicinin denetimi, gözetimi ve online alışveriş siteleri üzerine bir uygulama. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Andrejevic, M. (2014). Big data, big questions| the big data divide. International Journal of Communication, 8, 17. Andrejevic, M., & Gates, K. (2014). Big data surveillance: Introduction. Surveillance& Society, 12(2), 185-196. Aras, İ. (2022). Çin’in sosyal medya yükselişi ve siyasi tepkiler: TikTok. Armstrong, D. (1995). Theorise of surveillance medicine. Sociology of health&illness, 17(3), 393-404. Aspers, P., &Corte, U. (2019). What is qualitative in qualitative research. Qualitative sociology, 42, 139-160. Basturk, E. (2017). A brief analyze on post panoptic surveillance: Deleuze&Guattarian Approach. International Journal of Social Sciences, 6(2), 1-17. Baştürk, E. (2012). Michel Foucault’da liberalizm eleştirisi: İktidar, yönetimsellik ve güvenlik. Felsefe ve Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi (FLSF), (14). Bauman, Z. ve Lyon, D. (2020). Akışkan Gözetim. 4. Basım Elçin Yılmaz (Çev) İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları. Beck, C. (2016). Web of resistance: Deleuzian digital space and hacktivism. Journal for Cultural Research, 20(4), 334-349. Beck, U. (2008). World at risk: the new task of critical theory. Development and society, 37(1), 1-21. Beck, U. (2014). Five minutes with Ulrich Beck: “Digital freedom risk is one of the most important risks we face in modern society”. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog. Bentham, J., &Božovič, M. (1995). The panopticon writings. Verso Trade. Bernal, P. (2016). Data gathering, surveillance and human rights: recasting the debate. Journal of CyberPolicy, 1(2), 243-264. Berry, R. S. (1999). Collecting data by in-depth interviewing. Blevins, J. L. (2017). Panoptic missorts and the hegemony of US data privacy Policy. The Political Economy of Communication, 4(2). Boellstorff, T. (2013). Making big data, in theory. First Monday, 18(10). Bogard, W. (2006). Surveillance assemblages and lines of flight. In Theorizing surveillance (pp. 111-136). Willan. Bogard, W. (2006). Welcome to the Society of Control: The Simulation of Surveillance Revisited. En The New Politics of Surveillance and Visibility, Kevin D. Haggerty and Richard V. Ericson. Bogard, W. (2012). Simulation and post-panopticism. Routledge handbook of surveillance studies, 3-37. Bogard, W. (2013). Control surfaces and rhythmic gestures. Theory&Event, 16(3). Bogard, W. (2019). Welcome to the society of control: The simulation of surveillance revisited. In The new politics of surveillance and visibility (pp. 55-78). University of Toronto Press. Bogard, W. (1996). The simulation of surveillance: Hyper-Control in telematic societies. Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge. Bogner, A., & Menz, W. (2009). The theory-generating expert interview: epistemological interest, forms of knowledge, interaction. In Interviewing experts (pp. 43-80). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Bogner, A., Littig, B., &Menz, W. (2009). Introduction: Expert interviews-An introduction to a new methodological debate. In Interviewing experts (pp. 1-13). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Brayne, S. (2017). Big data surveillance: The case of policing. American sociological review, 82(5), 977-1008. Brayne, S. (2022). The banality of surveillance. Surveillance&Society, 20(4), 372-378. Bridle, J. (2020). Yeni Karanlık Çağ: Teknoloji ve Geleceğin Sonu. Kemal Güleç (Çev.) 2.Basım İstanbul: Metis Yayınları. Browne, S. (2010). Digital epidermalization: Race, identity and biometrics. Critical Sociology, 36(1), 131-150. Bulmer, M. (Ed.). (1977). Sociological research methods. Transaction Publishers. Büyükgaga, P. (2022). Dijital gözetim ve mahremiyetin dönüşümü: 'TheCircle' örneği. Yüksek lisans tezi. Caluya, G. (2010). The post-panoptic society? Reassessing Foucault in surveillance studies. Social Identities, 16(5), 621-633. Campbell, J. E., & Carlson, M. (2002). Panopticon. Com: Online surveillance and the commodification of privacy. Journal of Broadcasting& Electronic Media, 46(4), 586-606. Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological methods&research, 42(3), 294-320. Canbay, Y., Vural, Y., & Sağıroğlu, Ş. (2020). Mahremiyet korumalı büyük veri yayınlama için kavramsal model önerileri. Politeknik Dergisi, 23(3), 785-798. Chen K. (2017). No place to hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. surveillance state, Intelligence and National Security. 32(6), pp. 868–871. Chen, M., Mao, S., &Liu, Y. (2014). Big data: A survey. Mobile networks and Applications, 19(2), 171-209. Chen, Y., &Cheung, A. S. (2017). The transparent self under big data profiling: privacy and Chinese legislation on the social credit system. J. Comp. L., 12, 356. Chizea, O. (2022). It has been argued that ‘blackness’ is a key site through which surveillance is practiced, narrated and enacted. In short, as S. Browne puts it:‘Surveillance is nothing new to black folks. It is the fact of antiblackness’. (S. Browne, Dark Matters, p. 10). Kent LawReview, 7(1). Clarke, R. (1988). Information technology and dataveillance. Communications of the ACM, 31(5), 498-512. Clarke, R. (1996, May). Privacy and dataveillance, and organisational strategy. In Proceedings of the IS Audit& Control Association Conference (EDPAC’96). Clarke, R. (2003, March). Dataveillance–15 years on. In Privacy Issues Forum (Vol. 28). Clarke, R. (2006,). What's' Privacy'. In Australian law reform commission workshop (Vol. 28). Clarke, R. (2023). Dataveillance: delivering 1984. In Framing Technology (pp. 117 130). Routledge. Clarke, R., & Greenleaf, G. (2017). Dataveillance regulation: A research framework. JL Inf. &Sci., 25, 104. Cohen, I. G., &Mello, M. M. (2019). Big data, big tech, and protecting patient privacy. Jama, 322(12), 1141-1142. Creemers, R. (2017). Cyber China: Upgrading propaganda, public opinion work and social management for the twenty-first century. Journal of contemporary China, 26(103), 85-100. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2004). Principles of qualitative research: Designing a qualitative study. Office of Qualitative& Mixed Methods Research, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Croft, S. (2012). Constructing ontological insecurity: The insecuritization of Britain's Muslims. Contemporary security policy, 33(2), 219-235. Dalgalidere, S. (2016). Epistemolojik açıdan büyük veri ve gelecek tahmin sistemleri. Dandeker, C. (2019). 9. Surveillance and Military Transformation: Organizational Trends in Twenty-first Century Armed Services. In The new politics of surveillance and visibility (pp. 225-249). University of Toronto Press. Davenport, T. H., & Patil, D. J. (2012). Data scientist. Harvard businessreview, 90(5), 70-76. DegliEsposti, S. (2014). When big data meets dataveillance: The hidden side of analytics. Surveillance&Society, 12(2), 209-225. Deterding, N. M., &Waters, M. C. (2021). Flexible coding of in-depth interviews: A twenty-first-century approach. Sociologicalmethods&research, 50(2), 708-739. Dong, X. L., &Srivastava, D. (2013, April). Big data integration. In 2013 IEEE 29th international conference on datae ngineering (ICDE) (pp. 1245-1248). IEEE. Döringer, S. (2021). ‘The problem-centred expert interview’. Combining qualitative interviewing approaches for investigating implicit expert knowledge. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 24(3), 265 278. Drisko, J. W. (1997). Strengthening qualitative studies and reports: Standards to promote academic integrity. Journal of social work education, 33(1), 185-197. Durkheim, E. (2019). Sosyolojik Yöntemin Kuralları. Durmuşahmet, A. (2019). Ekonomi politik yaklaşım çerçevesinde yeni medyanın büyük veri üzerinden incelenmesi (Master'sthesis, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü). Eckmanns, T., Füller, H., & Roberts, S. L. (2019). Digital epidemiology and global health security; an interdisciplinary conversation. Life Sciences, Society and Policy, 15(1), 1-13. Ergen, Y. (2018). Büyük veri, sosyal medya ve etik: Facebook örneğinde bir değerlendirme. Ege Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Yeni Düşünceler Hakemli e Dergisi, (10), 53-64. Eroğlu, H. Ö. (2016). Foucault'nun İktidarları. Amme Idaresi Dergisi, 49(2). Eyüpoğlu, C., Aydın, M. A., Sertbaş, A., Zaim, A. H., &Öneş, O. (2017). Büyük Veride Kişi Mahremiyetinin Korunması. Bilişim Teknolojileri Dergisi, 10(2), 177-184. Fernández, J. V. (2023). The Risk of Digitalization: Transforming Government into a Digital Leviathan. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 30(1), 3-13. Finn, J. (2014). Liquid Surveillance: A Conversation. Canadian Journal of Communication, 39(3), 497. Fura, E., &Klamberg, M. (2012). The chilling effect of counter-terrorism measures: A comparative analysis of electronic surveillance laws in Europe and the USA. Freedom of Expression–Essays in honour of Nicolas Bratza–President of the European Court of Human Rights”, Wolf Legal Publishers, Oisterwijk, 463 481. Galič, M., Timan, T., &Koops, B. J. (2017). Bentham, Deleuze and beyond: An overview of surveillance theories from participation. Philosophy&Technology, 30(1), 9-37. the panopticon to Gambetti, Z. (2008). Foucault’da Disiplin Toplumu-Güvenlik Toplumu Ayrımı. Mesele Dergisi, 20, 1-9. GandyJr, O. H. (1996). Coming to Terms with the Panoptic Sort Oscar H. Gandy Jr. Computers, surveillance, and privacy, 132. GandyJr, O. H. (2003). Public opinion surveys and the formation of privacy policy. Journal of social issues, 59(2), 283-299. GandyJr, O. H. (2021). The panoptic sort: A political economy of personal information. Oxford University Press. Gartner, R., & Gartner, R. (2016). Metadata. Springer. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge. Gordon, L. (2019). Real research: Research methods sociology students can use. Sage Publications. Güneş, O. (2021). Türkiye’de siyasal partilerin seçim kampanyalarında büyük veri kullanımı üzerine niteliksel bir araştırma. Yüksek Lisans Tezi Haggerty, K. D., & Ericson, R. V. (2019). The New Politics of Surveillance and Visibility (pp. 3-26). University of Toronto Press. Harford, T. (2014). Big data: Are We Making a Big Mistake? Significance, 11(5), 14 19. Heawood, J. (2018). Pseudo-public political speech: Democratic implications of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Information polity, 23(4), 429-434. Holton, J. A. (2007). The coding process and its challenges. The Sage handbook of grounded theory, 3, 265-289. Huckvale, K., Venkatesh, S., & Christensen, H. (2019). Toward clinical digital phenotyping: a timely opportunity to consider purpose, quality, and safety. NPJ digital medicine, 2(1), 1-11. Jain, P., Gyanchandani, M., &Khare, N. (2016). Big data privacy: a technological perspective and review. Journal of Big Data, 3(1), 1-25. Jakku, E., Taylor, B., Fleming, A., Mason, C., Fielke, S., Sounness, C., &Thorburn, P. (2019). “If they don’t tell us what they do with it, why would we trust them?” Trust, transparency and benefit-sharing in Smart Farming. NJAS-Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 90, 100285. Kafer, G., &Grinberg, D. (2019). Queer surveillance. Surveillance&Society, 17(5), 592-601. Kalsın, B. (2023). TikTok Yasaklarının Arka Planı: Veri Güvenliği mi? Siyasi İlişkiler mi?. The Journal of Social Sciences, 64(64), 148-159. Karaarslan, E., Eren, M. B., & Koç, S. (2014). Çevrimiçi mahremiyet: teknik ve hukuksal durum incelemesi. Türkiye’de İnternet Konferansı Bildirisi, İzmir, 27- 29. Karafiloski, E., &Mishev, A. (2017, July). Blockchain solutions for big data challenges: A literature review. In IEEE EUROCON 2017-17th International Conference on Smart Technologies (pp. 763-768). Kavza, U. 2010. Veri madenciliğinde mahremiyetin sağlanması. Yüksek lisans tezi. Kaya, Y. B. (2021). Gizli baloncuklar: TikTok'taki gençlerin algoritmanın sağladığı yarı gizli ortamlardaki mahremiyet pratikleri. Yüksek lisans tezi. Kayaalp, M. (2018). Patient privacy in the era of big data. Balkan medical journal, 35(1), 8-17. Kiver, S. (2021). Unutulma hakkı: Mahremiyet, veri gizliliği ve etik tartışmalar. Yüksek lisans tezi. Kobelieva, D. L., &Nikolaienko, N. M. (2021). From Information Search to the Loss of Personality: The Phenomenon of Dataism. Anthropological Measurements of Philosophical Research, (20), 100-112. Konish, L. (2018). Financial advisors are missing one key technology disruption. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/12/financial-advisors-are missing-one-key-technology-disruption.html Köse, H. (2007). Yeni risk tanımlamaları bağlamında küresel medya. Selçuk İletişim, 5(1), 42-51. Kshetri, N. (2014). Bigdata׳ s impact on privacy, security and consumer welfare. Telecommunications Policy, 38(11), 1134-1145. Laudrain, A. P. (2019). Smart-city technologies, governmen tsurveillance and privacy: Assessing the potential for chilling effects and existing safeguards in the ECHR. Legard, R., Keegan, J., &Ward, K. (2003). In-depth interviews. Qualitative research practice: A guide for socia lscience students and researchers, 6(1), 138-169. Leonard, P. (2014). Customer data analytics: privacy settings for ‘Big Data’ business. International data privacy law, 4(1), 53-68. Lerman, J. (2013). Big data and its exclusions. Stan. L. Rev. Online, 66, 55. Liang, F., Das, V., Kostyuk, N., & Hussain, M. M. (2018). Constructing a data‐driven society: China's social credit system as a state surveillance infrastructure. Policy & Internet, 10(4), 415-453. Littig, B. (2009). Interviewing the elite—interviewing experts: is there a difference? In Interviewing experts (pp. 98-113). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. Lokke, E. (2020). Mahremiyet: Dijital Toplumda Özel Hayat.Dilek Başak (Çev.). 2.Basım. İstanbul: Küy Yayınları. Loshin, D. (2010). Master data management. Morgan Kaufmann. Lowry, D. W. (2004). Understanding reproductive technologies as a surveillant assemblage: Revisions perspectives, 47(4), 357-370. of power and technoscience. Sociological Lupton, D. (2013) The digital cyborg assemblage: Haraway’s cyborg theory and the new digital health technologies (preprint). In Collyer, F. (ed) (forthcoming), The Handbook of Social Theory for the Sociology of Health and Medicine. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Lupton, D. (2014). The commodification of patient opinion: the digital patient experience economy in the age of bigdata. Sociology of health& illness, 36(6), 856-869. Lupton, D. (2014). Digital sociology. Routledge. Lupton, D. (2014, December). Self-tracking cultures: towards a sociology of personal informatics. In Proceedings of the 26th Australian computer-human interaction conference on designing futures: The future of design (pp. 77-86). Lupton, D. (2015). The thirteen Ps of big data. This Sociological Life. Lupton, D. (2016). Digital companion species and eating data: Implications for theorising digital 2053951715619947. data–human assemblages. Big Data &Society, 3(1), Lupton, D. (2016). Digital risk society. Routledge handbook of risk studies, 301-309. Lupton, D. (2016). The diverse domains of quantifiedselves: self-tracking modes and dataveillance. Economy and Society, 45(1), 101-122. Lupton, D. (2016). The quantified self. John Wiley&Sons. Lupton, D., & Michael, M. (2017). ‘Depends on who’s got the data’: Public understandings of personal digital dataveillance. Surveillance&Society, 15(2), 254-268. Lycett, M. (2013). ‘Datafication’: making sense of (big) data in a complex world. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(4), 381-386. Lyon, D. (1992). The new surveillance: Electronic Technologies and the maximum security society. Crime, Law and Social Change, 18, 159-175. Lyon, D. (1994). The electronic eye: The rise of surveillance society. U of Minnesota Press. Lyon, D. (2003). Technologys ‘terrorism’: circuits of citysurveillance since September 11th. International Journal of Urban andRegionalResearch, 27(3), 666-678. Lyon, D. (2003). Surveillance technology and surveillance society. Modernityand technology, 161, 184. Lyon, D. (2004). Globalizin gsurveillance: Comparative ands ociological perspectives. International Sociology, 19(2), 135-149. Lyon, D. (2006). Günlük hayatı kontrol etmek: Gözetlenen toplum. Soykan, G. (Çev.). Kalkedon Yayıncılık. Lyon, D. (2007). Surveillance studies: An overview. Lyon, D. (2010). Liquid surveillance: Thecontribution of ZygmuntBaumanto surveillance studies. International politicalsociology, 4(4), 325-338. Lyon, D. (2013). Gözetim çalışmaları: genel bir bakış. Kalkedon Yayınları. Lyon, D. (2014). Surveillance, Snowden, and big data: Capacities, consequences, critique. Big data&Society, 1(2), 2053951714541861. Lyon, D. (2015). Surveillance after Snowden. John Wiley&Sons. Lyon, D. (2019). 2. 9/11, Synopticon, and Scopophilia: Watching and Being Watched. In The new politics of surveillance and visibility (pp. 35-54). University of Toronto Press. Lyon, D. (Ed.). (2006). Theorizing surveillance. Routledge. Lyotard, J. F. (1994). The postmodern condition. The Postmodern Turn: New Perspectives on Social Theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. England, 27 38. Madden, S. (2012). From databases to big data. IEEE Internet Computing, 16(3), 4-6. Manley, A., Palmer, C., &Roderick, M. (2012). Disciplinary power, the oligopticon and rhizomatic surveillance in elite sports academies. Surveillance& society, 10(3/4), 303-319. Martinez-Martin, N., Insel, T. R., Dagum, P., Greely, H. T., &Cho, M. K. (2018). Data mining for health: staking out the ethical territory of digital phenotyping. NPJ digital medicine, 1(1), 68. Marx, G. T. (2001). Murky conceptual waters: The public and the private. Ethics and Information technology, 3(3), 157-169. Marx, G. T. (2002). What's New About the" New Surveillance"? Classifying for Change and Continuity. Surveillance&Society, 1(1), 9-29. Marx, G. T. (2013). The public as partner? Technology can make us auxiliaries as well as vigilantes. IEEE Security &Privacy, 11(5), 56-61. Marx, G. T. (2015). Comingtoterms: the kaleidoscope of privacy and surveillance. Social dimensions of privacy: Interdisciplinary perspectives, 32-49 Marx, G. T. (2015). Surveillance studies. International encyclopedia of the social& behavioral sciences, 23(2), 733-741. Marx, G. T., Lyon, D., &Ball, K. S. (2015). Presentation of the Surveillance Studies Network Outstanding Achievement Award. Surveillance&Society, 13(3/4), 539 546. Mathiesen, T. (1997). The viewer society: Michel Foucault’s Panopticon revisited. Theoretical criminology, 1(2), 215-234. Maxwell, J. A. (2008). Designing a qualitative study (Vol. 2, pp. 214-253). The SAGE handbook of applied social research methods. McAfee, A., Brynjolfsson, E., Davenport, T. H., Patil, D. J., &Barton, D. (2012). Big data: the management revolution. Harvard business review, 90(10), 60-68. Mears, C. L. (2012). In-depth interviews. Research methods and methodologies in education, 19, 170-176. Mejias, U. A., &Couldry, N. (2019). Datafication. Internet Policy Review, 8(4). Mermutlu, A. (2010). Görünürlük uzamlarında kamusallık, denetim, mahremiyet: İstanbul örneğinde kameralı gözetimin sosyo-politiği. Doktora tezi. Michael, M., &Lupton, D. (2016). Toward a manifesto for the ‘public understanding of bigdata’. Public Understanding of Science, 25(1), 104-116. Monea, A. (2019). Race and computer vision. Mooney, S. J., &Pejaver, V. (2018). Bigdata in public health: terminology, machine learning, and privacy. Annual review of public health, 39, 95-112. Morse, J. M. (1991). Strategies for sampling. Qualitative nursing research: A contemporary dialogue, 127, 145. Nemorin, S. (2017). Post-panoptic pedagogies: The changing nature of school surveillance in the digital age. Surveillance and Society, 15(2), 239-253. Newell, B. C., &Tennis, J. (2014). Me, my metadata, and the NSA: Privacy and government metadata surveillance programs. Proceedings of the 2014 iConference, 345-55. Oflas, S. P. (2020). Büyük Veri Teknolojisi Çağında Kullanıcı Verilerinin Gizlilik ve Mahremiyetine İlişkin Sosyolojik Analiz. O'Leary, D. E. (2013). Artificial intelligence and big data. IEEE intelligent systems, 28(2), 96-99. Onnela, J. P. (2021). Opportunities and challenges in the collection and analysis of digital phenotyping data. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46(1), 45-54. Orito, Y. (2011). The counter‐control revolution: “silent control” of individuals through dataveillance systems. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society. Orwant, C. J. (1996). Book review: The Electronic Eye by David Lyon. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 26(2), 30-31. Orwell, G. (2020). Bin Dokuz Yüz Seksen Dört. Celal Üster (Çev.) 20. Basım. İstanbul: Can Modern Yayınları. Özdemir, Ş. (2020). Post-panoptikon çağı: Gözetimin dijitalleşmesi ve çevrimiçi kimliğin gizliliği üzerine bir analiz. Anadolu Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(3), 81-108. Özkan, Ö. (2010). Sağlık hizmetinden yararlanan bireylerin, elektronik ortamda tutulan sağlık bilgilerinin gizliliği ve mahremiyeti ile ilgili görüş ve düşünceleri. Yüksek lisans tezi. Özkazanç, A. (2007). Biyo-politik çağda suç ve cezalandırma: Denetim Toplumunda Neo-liberal Yönetimsellik. Toplum ve Bilim, 108, 15-51. Öztürk, H. Veri gazeteciliğinin Türkiye’deki durumu: Uluslararası platformlarla karşılaştırma (Master's thesis, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü). Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., &Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and policy in mental health and mental health services research, 42, 533-544. Palmatier, R. W., &Martin, K. D. (2019). The intelligent marketer's guide to data privacy: The impact of big data on customer trust. Springer International Publishing. Pedersen, J. S. (2019). 15. The digital welfare state: Dataism versus relationshipism. Big Data: Promise, Application and Pitfalls, 301. Penn Today. (2021). The Panoptic Sort: Surveillance Q&A with Oscar Gandy. Erişim Tarihi 02.11.2021 ThePanopticSort: Surveillance Q&A with Oscar Gandy | Penn Today (upenn.edu) Pero, R. (2015). Liquid surveillance: A conversation. Pero, R. (2015). Liquid surveillance: A conversation. Provost, F., &Fawcett, T. (2013). Data science and its relationship to big data and data driven decision making. Bigdata, 1(1), 51-59. Puaschunder, J. M. (2019, October). The legal and international situation of AI, robotics and big data with attention to health care. In Report on behalf of the European Parliament European liberal Forum. Queirós, A., Faria, D., &Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. European journal of education studies. Ramadan, Z. (2018). The gamification of trust: the case of China’s “social credit”. Marketing Intelligence& Planning, 36(1), 93-107. Regan, P. M. (2017). Opening windows on surveillance: Scholarship of Gary Marx. Society, 54, 363-366. Reidenberg, J. R., &Schaub, F. (2018). Achieving big data privacy in education. Theory and Research in Education, 16(3), 263-279. Rich, E., &Miah, A. (2009). Prosthetic surveillance: The medical governance of healthy bodies in cyberspace. Surveillance&Society, 6(2), 163-177. Riehl, C. (2001). Bridges To the future: The contributions of qualitative research to the sociology of education. Sociology of Education, 115-134. Rumelili, B., &Adisönmez, U. C. (2020). Uluslararası ilişkilerde kimlik-güvenlik ilişkisine dair yeni bir paradigma: Ontolojik güvenlik teorisi. Uluslararası İlişkiler Dergisi, 17(66), 23-39. Salathé, M. (2018). Digital epidemiology: what is it, and where is it going? Life sciences, society and policy, 14(1), 1. Salathe, M., Bengtsson, L., Bodnar, T. J., Brewer, D. D., Brownstein, J. S., Buckee, C., ... &Vespignani, A. (2012). Digital epidemiology. Samerski, S. (2018). Individuals on alert: digital epidemiology and the individualization of surveillance. Life sciences, society and policy, 14, 1-11 Schermann, M., Hemsen, H., Buchmüller, C., Bitter, T., Krcmar, H., Markl, V., & Hoeren, T. (2014). Bigdata. Business Engineering, 6(5), 261-266. & Information Systems Schlichter, B. R., &Rose, J. (2013). Trust dynamics in a large system implementation: six theoretical propositions. European Journal of Information Systems, 22(4), 455-474. Schwandt, T. A. (1994). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. Handbook of qualitative research, 1(1994), 118-137. Selçuk, A. (2015). Büyük veri üzerinde dağıtık dosya sistemi ve paralel işleme kullanarak mahremiyet korumalı arama. Yüksek Lisans tezi Shahzad, F. (2021). Türkiye'deki seçim kampanyalarında yapay zekâ ve büyük veri kullanımı. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Solmaz, M. (2020). Güncel Gözetimi Bauman’ın Sosyal Teorisinden Hareketle Anlamak. Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(1), 1-10. Sopaoğlu, U. (2021). Büyük veri ve akan verinin mahremiyet korumalı anonimleştirilmesi. Doktora tezi. Stockdale, D. (2014). Data governance and data stewardship. Handbook of Financial Data and Risk Information II, 2, 464. Strawn, G. (2016). Data scientist. IT Professional, 18(3), 55-57. Subudhi, B. N., Rout, D. K., &Ghosh, A. (2019). Big data analytics for video surveillance. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 78(18), 26129-26162. Sucu, İ. (2020). Gözetlenen Toplumun Gözetleyen Topluma Dönüşmesi: “The Truman Show Filmi” Örneği. Aksaray İletişim Dergisi, 2(1), 1-12. Sullivan, J. (2014). Uncovering the data panopticon: The urgent need for critical scholarship in an era of corporate and government surveillance. The Political Economy of Communication, 1(2). Sustam, E. (2016). Foucault’da İktidarın Jeneolojisi: Biyopolitiğin Doğuşu ve Yönetimsellik. Şahin, O. (2020). Bilgi sosyolojisi bağlamında büyük veri ve toplumsal gerçekliğin inşası (Master'sthesis, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü). Şinşek, M. Y. (2022). Büyük veri ve öznellik: Cambridge Analytica örneği. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded theory in practice. Sage. Tahaoğlu, O. O. (2009). Türkiye'de kişisel verilerin korunması: Mahremiyet risk yönetimine yönelik bir bilgi teknolojileri çerçevesi. Doktora tezi. Tankard, C. (2012). Big data security. Network security, 2012(7), 5-8. Tomaszewski, L. E., Zarestky, J., & Gonzalez, E. (2020). Planning qualitative research: Design and decision making for new researchers. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1609406920967174. Toy, F. (2019). Büyük verilere yetkisiz erişimlerin tespit edilmesi ve engellenmesi tekniklerinin incelenmesi ve uygulaması. Tredinnick, L. (2008). Digital information culture: the individual and society in the digital age. Elsevier. Trottier, D., & Lyon, D. (2013). Key features of social media surveillance. In Internet and Surveillance (pp. 109-125). Routledge. Tufekci, Z. (2014). Engineering the public: Bigdata, surveillance and computational politics. First Monday. Turancı, E. (2021). Dijital dünyada kişisel veri ve etik: Gizlilik politikası bağlamında “# WhatsApp siliyoruz” Akademi, 6(12), 272-295. krizinde kullanıcı tepkilerini anlamak. TRT Uyanık, G. (2022). Büyük veri analitiği ve mahremiyeti: Mobil uygulamaların kullanım düzeyi ve gizlilik endişesi üzerine bir inceleme. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Van der Aalst, W. M. (2014). Data scientist: The engineer of the future. In Enterprise interoperability VI: Inter-operability for agility, resilience and plasticity of collaborations (pp. 13-26). Springer International Publishing. Van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance&society, 12(2), 197-208. Vollstedt, M., & Rezat, S. (2019). An introduction to grounded theory with a special focus on axial coding and the coding paradigm. Compendium for early career researchers in mathematics education, 13(1), 81-100. Wang, Y. (2016). Big opportunities and big concerns of big data in education. Tech Trends, 60(4), 381-384. Wood, D. M., Ball, K., Lyon, D., Norris, C., &Raab, C. (2006). A report on the surveillance society. Surveillance Studies Network, UK, 1-98. Yu, S. (2016). Big privacy: Challenges and opportunities of privacy study in the age of bigdata. IEEE access, 4, 2751-2763. Yücedağ, İ. (2017). Modern Toplumda Denetim Asemblajı. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, (41), 161-176. Zengin, İ. G. (2021). Web sitelerine karşı tüketicilerin yararlığı, riski ve güven algısıyla, satın alma amacı üzerindeki büyük veri etkilerini anlamak. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Zimmer, M. (2008). the gaze of the perfect search engine: Google as an infrastructure of dataveillance. In Web search: Multidisciplinary perspectives (pp. 77-99). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Zuboff, S. (2014). A digital declaration. Frankfurter Allgemeine, 9. Zuboff, S. (2015). Big other: surveillance capitalism and the prospects of an information civilization. Journal of information technology, 30(1), 75-89. Zuboff, S. (2019, January). Surveillance capitalism and the challenge of collective action. In New labor forum (Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 10-29). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications. Zuboff, S. (2023). The age of surveillance capitalism. In Social Theory Re-Wired (pp. 203-213). Routledge. Zuboff, S., Möllers, N., Wood, D. M., & Lyon, D. (2019). Surveillance capitalism: An interview with Shoshana Zuboff. Surveillance&Society, 17(1/2), 257-266.tr_TR
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11655/34409
dc.description.abstractThis study aims to evaluate the increasing impact of big data, considering the potential that data collected about individuals can be used for social, cultural, economic, and political purposes with the development of information and communication technologies and surveillance systems. With this aim, social changes caused by big data and new surveillance practices are examined, especially based on datafication and data surveillance. The research was carried out by conducting expert interviews and in-depth interviews with 16 data scientists (as they are individuals who experience these systems and can predict the consequences they may cause). Through the interviews it is examined with a constructivist perspective and the qualitative analysis method what kind of strategy individuals have developed in terms of ontological security (what kind of coping strategy they develop against reactions, fears and anxieties that arise due to changes) and how these strategies and solution suggestions can become beneficial in society. As a result of the evaluations, when viewed from the eyes of data scientists, it is seen that the definition and content of big data has changed, and this creates a completely new digital surveillance practice. In this context, big data is considered as the basic element of decision-making mechanisms and as a type of capital and classification tool. Big data and new surveillance practices are associated with a variety of problems, such as the right to be forgotten, sanctions for control purposes, data security and manipulation, security breach, rotted data, discrimination, panoptic classification, lack of anonymity, power imbalance or monopolization of power, echo chamber, prejudice in social relations. In the study, new surveillance practices are particularly associated with security, risk, and identification of the other; it is seen that "micro-level surveillance practices" are also applied in the field of social relations and responsibilities. In terms of ontological security, it is seen that data breaches in the participants' own countries raise "doubt about their own security" in them; while examining the contribution of big data and ontological security of these systems for social benefit; it is understood that ontological insecurity becomes more evident with the conceptualization of big data for social harm. It is also seen and explained that there are findings that the participants mostly resort to a pragmatic acceptance (implicit pessimism) strategy in the sense of ontological security/insecurity, but they also have strategies that can be evaluated in the sense of constant optimism, cynical pessimism, and radical participation. In the context of these strategies, solution suggestions are offered in different areas in line with the opinions of data scientists.tr_TR
dc.language.isoturtr_TR
dc.publisherSosyal Bilimler Enstitüsütr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesstr_TR
dc.subjectBüyük veritr_TR
dc.subjectDijital gözetim
dc.subjectVerileşme
dc.subjectVeri gözetimi
dc.subjectOntolojik güvenlik
dc.subject.lcshSosyolojitr_TR
dc.titleBüyük Verinin Büyük Biradere Dönüşümü: Dijital Sosyoloji Perspektifinden Bireyin Verileşmesi ve Veri Gözetimitr_TR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesistr_TR
dc.description.ozetBu çalışmada bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin ve gözetim sistemlerinin gelişimiyle birlikte bireyler hakkında toplanan verilerin toplumsal, kültürel, ekonomik, siyasi amaçlarla kullanıldığı ve kullanılabileceği potansiyeli düşünülerek büyük verinin artan etkisinin değerlendirilmesi hedeflenmektedir. Bu hedefle özellikle verileştirme ve veri gözetimi temel alınarak, büyük veri ve yeni gözetim pratiklerinin yol açtığı toplumsal değişimler incelenmektedir. Araştırma, 16 veri bilimcisi (bu sistemleri ve onların yol açabileceği sonuçları öngörebilen ve aynı zamanda deneyimleyen bireyler oldukları için) ile uzman mülakatları ve derinlemesine mülakatlar yapılarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Mülakatlar ile onların ontolojik güvenlik (bireylerin değişimler dolayısıyla ortaya çıkan tepkiler, korkular ve endişelere karşı ne tür bir başa çıkma stratejisi geliştirdikleri incelendiği için) anlamında ne tür bir strateji geliştirdiği, bu strateji ve çözüm önerilerinin toplumda da nasıl fayda sağlar hale gelebileceği inşacı bir bakış açısı ve nitel analiz yöntemiyle analiz edilmektedir. Değerlendirmeler sonucunda, veri bilimcilerin gözünden bakıldığında, büyük verinin tanımının ve içeriğinin değiştiği ve bunun tamamen yeni bir dijital gözetim pratiği oluşturduğu görülmektedir. Bu çerçevede büyük veri karar verme mekanizmalarının temel öğesi, bir tür sermaye ve sınıflandırma aracı olarak ele alınmaktadır. Büyük veri ve yeni gözetim pratikleri, unutulma hakkı, kontrol amaçlı yaptırım, veri güvenliği ve manipülasyonu, güvenlik ihlali, bozulmuş veri, ayrımcılık, panoptik sınıflandırma, anonimliğin kalmaması, güç dengesizliği ya da gücün tekelleşmesi, yankı odası, sosyal ilişkilerde ön yargı gibi pek çok sorunla ilişkilendirilmektedir. Çalışmada yeni gözetim pratiklerinin özellikle güvenlik, risk ve ötekinin tanımlanması ile ilişkilendirildiği; sosyal ilişkiler ve sorumluluklar alanında da “mikro düzeyde gözetim pratiklerinin” uygulandığı görülmektedir. Katılımcıların ontolojik güvenlik anlamında özellikle kendi ülkelerindeki veri ihlallerinin onlarda “kendi güvenliğine ilişkin şüphe” yarattığı görülmekte; sosyal fayda için büyük veri ile bu sistemlerin ontolojik güvenliğe katkısı incelenirken; sosyal zarar için büyük veri kavramsallaştırmasıyla ontolojik güvensizliğin daha belirgin hale geldiği anlaşılmaktadır. Katılımcıların ontolojik güvenlik/güvensizlik anlamında daha çok pragmatik bir kabulleniş (örtülü bir kötümserlik) stratejisine başvurdukları, ama sürekli iyimserlik, alaycı kötümserlik ve radikal katılım anlamında değerlendirilebilecek stratejilere de sahip olduklarına dair bulgular olduğu da görülmekte ve açıklanmaktadır. Bu stratejiler bağlamında veri bilimcilerin görüşleri doğrultusunda farklı alanlarda çözüm önerileri sunulmaktadır.tr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentSosyolojitr_TR
dc.embargo.termsAcik erisimtr_TR
dc.embargo.lift2023-12-26T07:28:22Z
dc.fundingYoktr_TR


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster