Assessing the Impact of Sociotechnical Convergence Risks on the Process of Digital Marginalization

Zotov Vitaliy Vladimirovich ORCID: 0000-0003-1083-1097 Professor; Humanities & Social Sciences Center; Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (National Research University) 141701, Russia, Moscow region, Dolgoprudny, Institutsky lane, 9 om_zotova@mail.ru Other publications by this author     Gavrilchenko Kirill Eduardovich ORCID: 0009-0003-4424-2423 Postgraduate student; Department of Social Technologies and Public Service; Belgorod State National Research University Junior Researcher; Humanities & Social Sciences Center; Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (National Research University) 141701, Russia, Moscow region, Dolgoprudny, Institutsky lane, 9 gavril4e@yandex.ru

Gubanov Alexander Vladimirovich ORCID: 0000-0003-4810-6165 PhD in Sociology Senior Researcher; Humanities & Social Sciences Center; Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (National Research University) 141701, Russia, Moscow region, Dolgoprudny, Institutsky lane, 9 aleksandrgubanov1@mail.ru

Introduction

The term "sociotechnical convergence" refers to the process of interaction of technical and technological elements of digital services, devices and technologies with human agents, which leads to the formation of a new sociotechnical reality. This reality cannot be adequately analyzed solely through the prism of social or technical factors, as it represents a complex system of interdependencies between technological innovations and social practices.

As a result of sociotechnical convergence, the hybridization of social space occurs — the mixed interaction of people with each other in virtual and real environments. An example of such a hybrid social space can be observed in a situation where people communicate simultaneously in a real meeting and through social networks or instant messengers, creating a single communication stream that includes elements of both worlds. Thus, we are faced with a new hybrid reality, where the real and virtual worlds connect, and technical and social systems coexist and interact.

In the context of modern daily life, digital services, devices and technologies are playing an increasingly important role. Today, their use is a prerequisite for adapting to the rapidly changing realities of the world around us. Some people actively perceive innovations and use them with great interest, but the other part treats new technologies with caution, sometimes with hostility. The result is a situation where an individual begins to change his connections and relationships in his habitual environment to their digital format in order to adapt to the conditions of a hybrid social space. During this period, he essentially remains in a borderline state between digital and physical realities. In sociology, such a borderline, transitional state between two lifestyles associated with different social groups/communities is traditionally called a marginal position. But there are also those who do not accept these changes. They may find themselves outside the actively developing "hybrid reality" and, to one degree or another, be excluded from the life of society. Here we are already dealing with the alienation of man from society, as well as society from man.

In the context of modern realities, the phenomenon of marginality requires revision, which necessitates the need to clarify the factors influencing its evolution. According to our hypothesis, the risks of sociotechnical convergence should be highlighted among the latter. Hence, it is extremely relevant to understand the impact of sociotechnical convergence risks on the occurrence of this phenomenon when studying the processes of possible marginalization of a part of the population in an intensively developing digital environment.

The object of the research is the phenomenon of sociotechnical convergence, which determines the hybridization of social space, due to which simultaneous interaction of people with each other takes place both in digital and in real space. The subject of the study was the influence of this phenomenon on the process of digital marginalization, which appears as the transition of individuals into an intermediate state between these two social spaces. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of various risks of sociotechnical convergence on the process of population marginalization.

Theoretical and methodological foundations of the research

Due to the novelty of the study of the impact of the phenomenon of sociotechnical convergence on the processes of digital marginalization, it is necessary to turn to the theoretical and methodological foundations of the analysis of both the marginalization itself and the assessment of sociotechnical risks.

1. The concept of "marginality" was introduced into sociology in the 1920s by R.E. Park, who was a representative of the Chicago School of Urban Sociology ^[19]. Exploring immigrant communities in American cities and racial intercultural interaction, he raised the question of the "borderline" type of person who leads his existence on the borders of different cultures. He believed that the phenomenon of marginality is associated with the process of adaptation of migrants who find themselves in a new, unusual socio-cultural ethnospace. According to R. Park, a marginal person lives simultaneously in two worlds – his own, traditional, and a new, acquired one. Therefore, his social position in society is relatively shaky. In this case, a marginal personality is the result of ethnosocial transformations in a globalizing world. The phenomenon of marginality is considered as a transitional state from one way of life to another, from one culture to another ^[12]. The ideas of R. Park, in particular, continue to be developed by M.D. Napso. According to her views, the marginality (marginal position) of an individual influences his consciousness, lifestyle and behavior in a very contradictory way ^[9].

In Russian science, it is more often believed that the phenomenon of "marginalization" is determined by the processes of changes in the social structure, therefore this process is defined as the displacement of individuals or entire social groups outside the existing social structure as a result of social transformations ^[7], a sharp socio-economic and socio-cultural restructuring of society ^[10]. Based on this, the main trend in the transformation of the social structure of modern Russian society is the deepening of inequality in economic, political, social and other indicators ^{[11, p.128]}. The peculiarity of the formation of marginal positions can be associated with changes in social status, social ties, socio-cultural environment, loss of previous self-identification, as well as value orientations. At the same time, in modern socio-humanitarian discourse, marginality is often considered as a negative trait that must be eradicated ^{[2;5; 11]}.

The scientific study of marginality and marginalization has not lost its importance at the present time, as a hybrid social reality is emerging during the digital transformation. In our opinion, it is Robert Park's concept of sociocultural marginalization and the Russian concept of structural marginalization, adapted to the new realities of the hybrid social space, that can become the methodological foundations for the study of digital marginalization of modern society.

As we dive deeper into the "digital age", there is a growing research interest in understanding and solving the problems of marginalization of representatives of certain vulnerable groups caused by social exclusion, the digital divide and inequality, and the lack of adaptation of digital services to the special needs of representatives of these groups. ^{[3;13;14;15;16;17;20]}. Vulnerable groups usually include women and children, migrants and refugees, small ethnic groups and indigenous peoples, the homeless and the elderly. At the same time, the analysis of publications suggests that there has been practically no research on the relationship between the process of marginalization in connection with the development of digital technologies.

2. Currently, there are many different points of view on how to sociologically identify hazards and risks, including those related to the digital transformation process.

The dangers are objective in nature ^[8]. Therefore, the definition of danger connects it with the object, that is, in our case, with the process of sociotechnical convergence leading to the formation of a hybrid social space of digital society. Danger is a complex of various factors and conditions that can have a destabilizing, destructive, and/or dysfunctional effect directly on a person, their consciousness, or their environment. These are exogenous, objectively determined factors and therefore independent of the individual's will.

Unlike dangers, risks arise as a result of the perception and representation of dangers in the human mind, that is, they are subjective. "An individual takes into account only those probabilities that he imagines, and not those that actually exist. At the same time, there is no reason to believe that subjective probabilities should be equal to objective probabilities" ^[1]. In this case, the risk refers to the subject who makes a decision and acts in uncertain conditions of manifestation of dangers ^{[18, p. 23]}. Thus, danger is associated with objects that are independent of the individual, who cannot control them or choose behaviors. Risk arises at the moment of choosing a certain behavior model in a specific risk situation. "Risk is the conversion of hazards, that is, the process of recognizing and assessing the level of hazards from the perspective of their impact on the person himself, his daily behavior" ^{[6, P.10]}. For example, an assessment of the likelihood of a fire in an apartment due to faulty electrical wiring. A person is aware of the danger of a short circuit, evaluates the likelihood of this event and takes measures to minimize the risk, such as checking the condition of the wiring or installing circuit breakers. In our opinion, it would be quite reasonable to define "risk as a person's exposure to certain dangers that can lead to the destruction of established social practices of everyday life" ^{[6, p.11]}. And recognizing a high probability of risk triggers the process of individuals limiting their use of digital devices, services, and technologies, or even abandoning them. As a result, a person finds himself on the edge of the digital world, depriving himself of a higher standard of living.

The dangers of sociotechnical convergence can be classified depending on the level of subjectivity into service, intentional and mental ^[6].

Service hazards are associated with technical failures and errors in the operation of digital devices, services and technologies, that is, they occur without human intervention. The appearance of such hazards is determined by the unreliability of the equipment, the lack of prevention and the imperfection of algorithms. Such hazards include errors in the storage, collection, accounting, and processing of data, which are caused by failures in software and hardware, as well as any other violation of the algorithms of artificial intelligence systems. It is believed that algorithms often fail to deal with marginalized groups, denying them access to public goods and thus perpetuating existing inequalities. Such hazards turn into technical and technological risks when they are converted.

But in many cases, people, not technology, form the weakest link in the security of a digital society. Certain "bad" subjects of the digital space can take advantage of this circumstance. Intentional hazards include those caused by the deliberate actions of these intruders against other users in order to cause harm or damage. They are associated with unauthorized and unlawful access to personal information, both through the development and use of malicious software, and through the use of social engineering methods. When converted, such dangers transform and become sociotechnical risks.

Mental hazards are hazards caused by the peculiarities of individuals' cognitive perception of the new digital environment and their behavioral patterns in the emerging hybrid social space, which depend on the availability or absence of certain resources, such as technical devices, access to the Internet and various digital services. In this situation, a person's actions (or lack thereof) make their life much less comfortable and safe. These hazards acquire the character of risks of social vulnerability as part of the convergence process.

Research methods

The expert assessment method was used to assess the impact of sociotechnical convergence on the processes of digital marginalization. As noted by M. K. Gorshkov and F. E. Sheregi, this method is effective for assessing the state of an object or situation, the level of deviation of their parameters, forecasting trends in the development of phenomena and processes, developing forms and methods for solving problems, as well as analyzing the causes of phenomena or processes ^{[4, p.140]}.

Specialists who face various aspects of digital transformation in general and discriminatory processes in particular were selected as experts. In December 2024, an expert survey was conducted among specialists by sending links to the questionnaire via e-mail. The survey was organized using the Yandex service. This study focused on the study of technical, technological and socio-technical risks that affect the processes of marginalization, as well as analyzed the social vulnerabilities that can enhance this process.

The sample was formed from the following categories: 1) state and municipal employees dealing with information technology (IT) and/or social issues; 2) employees of information technology (IT) enterprises; 3) members of political parties, public organizations, as well as heads of socially oriented non-profit organizations; 4) representatives of scientific and expert communities. Such a selection of experts can guarantee compliance with the principles of typicality (choosing the most typical representative of the practice being studied) and competence (choosing a specialist from the relevant field of professional knowledge).

A total of 111 emails were sent. 106 respondents responded to these letters.Then there was a rejection process, during which those that were either not filled out according to the instructions, or the persons who filled them out did not meet the selection criteria for participation in the study (namely, by length of service and activity profile) were excluded from the initial list of questionnaires. As a result, after the rejection process was completed, 100 respondents were included in the final sample, whose data met all the established criteria and could be used for further analysis.

According to the research program, the assessment of possibilities was carried out by evaluating various options. The assessment was carried out by assigning experts points on a 10-point scale, where they also had the opportunity to express their own opinions about each option. The experts were instructed on how to assess the impact of risks on the process of marginalization. Thus, the risk was considered extremely important with a score of more than 8 points; significant – with a score from 5 to 7 points; significant – with a score from 2 to 4 points; and the absence of influence corresponded to a score of 1 point.

For the main comparison of the response options, the median was used as an estimate, above which more than half of the surveyed experts gave their marks. For additional analysis, we used the average value (), calculated by adding the estimates of each expert and then dividing the amount obtained by their number, as well as the average deviation, calculated as follows, where is the sample average and n is the sample size. However, unlike the standard deviation, the average deviation is less sensitive to extreme values ("outliers"). And since there are abnormal values in the expert estimates that are close to the opposite relative to the median, it seems appropriate to refer to this indicator. In addition, it should be noted that exceeding the average deviation by more than two points indicates a significant degree of disagreement among experts.

Results and discussion

Initially, the impact of technical and technological risks on the process of marginalization was assessed (Table 1).

Table 1. – Assessment of the impact of technical and technological risks on the process of marginalization on a 10-point scale.

According to the presented results, for digital marginalization, the most significant technical and technological risks that have scored more than 8 points are the following: "service failure that leads to leakage of user's personal data", "data loss due to the destruction of the user's digital profile".

It should be noted that such a risk as "microchipping (implantation of microchips into the human body) for identification" can also be attributed to extremely significant, since the median value was 8 points, that is, more than 50% of experts chose it as such. However, the spread of expert opinions on this issue is significant – the average deviation exceeds 2.5 points. It is worth noting that 10% of experts had difficulty answering this question. This indicates that the implantation of microchips into the human body is a rather controversial topic, which causes different reactions from experts. You can agree that microchips can greatly simplify interaction with various devices and services (for example, in the case of contactless payment, opening a passage, authentication), increase security and monitor health status by sending notifications to doctors if problems arise or even automatically adjusting the dosage of medications. But in this case, it opens up the possibility of identifying a person by an implanted chip, which reduces the degree of freedom of a person. In addition, many people are afraid of the introduction of new technologies into their bodies, especially considering that in some religions and cultural traditions there is a negative attitude towards interference in the human body.

All other risks of sociotechnical convergence proposed for consideration fell under the "significant risk" assessment. But experts did not give an unambiguous assessment to some of them, namely: "the use of biometrics" and "identification failure/error when logging into an account on a digital platform (service)." Again, this is probably due to the ambiguity of the impact of these risks on the process of marginalization. For example, the introduction of biometric systems can be considered as one of the strategies for optimizing interaction with technical means, similar in nature to the implantation of microchips. Therefore, the experts' assessment in this case is similar. A low level of assessment of the risk of failure/error when identifying account login on the digital platform (service) The reason for marginalization is the following. The problem that arises due to failures or errors in the authentication process when accessing digital platforms is currently being effectively resolved due to both the operational measures taken by users with the necessary knowledge of the login procedure and the actions of the owners of digital platforms.

Thus, the pursuit of security is one of the fundamental needs in human life and society as a whole. Therefore, the security of using a digital service is extremely important, and in the absence of it, people tend to limit the use of digital technologies or abandon them, which contributes to their marginalization.

According to the data presented in table 2, the most significant risks, according to experts, are the following: "fraudulent use of other people's personal data to receive citizens' money", "hacking of an account by an attacker to discredit its owner", "illegal use of other people's personal data to benefit companies/ the state", "creation of fake accounts (clones) to introduce fraudulent activity" (their average score is more than 8 points, and the median offset is 9 points). This indicates that the process of marginalization is intensifying due to the sensitive activities of some participants in the hybrid space. They use the technical and technological capabilities of this space for personal enrichment at the expense of, as a rule, vulnerable segments of the population, thereby exacerbating their rejection of the new hybrid world.

Table 2. – Assessment of the impact of socio-technical risks on the process of marginalization on a 10-point scale.

According to experts, all other positions proposed for consideration were assessed as "significant risk". Note that the latter are related to the direct activity of the user, that is, in this case, he can voluntarily abandon the use of virtual channels in favor of others. For example, you can opt out of receiving news information via the Internet and prefer watching the news on TV. Instead of communicating with friends, colleagues or relatives through various online platforms and social networks, you should choose face-to-face live communication. Also, instead of using chatbots to resolve issues related to various services, it is better to contact real representatives of companies directly who can provide the necessary assistance.

Thus, for sociotechnical risks, the issue of the safety of oneself and the user's personal data is again put first by experts.

All the proposed social vulnerabilities were recognized by experts as significant risks, given their potential association with lack of access to resources, insufficient support from society and the state, as well as with certain personal characteristics of individuals (Table 3). However, it is noteworthy that when assessing social vulnerabilities, more than 50% of experts gave 8 points or higher to such positions as "internal resistance caused by unwillingness to change", "lack of knowledge and skills to use digital services, devices and technologies", "lack of modern technology for working with services" (see the median value).

Table 3. – Assessment of the impact of social vulnerabilities on the process of marginalization on a 10-point scale.

It should be noted that the expert assessment of the situation is uncertain due to the lack of technical means for interacting with digital platforms (the average deviation is 2.5 points). In our opinion, despite the fact that the level of penetration of digital devices into everyday life is high, there is a tendency for prices of digital equipment to rise due to the introduction of a number of economic sanctions and trade restrictions. In addition, the increasing complexity of the design and functionality of such devices also have an impact on their cost. As a result, some users are faced with the fact that the latest and most effective technical tools are becoming unavailable.

Conclusion

Today, the use of digital services, devices and technologies is a prerequisite for normal life in a rapidly changing world. Those who restrict their use or abandon them altogether may find themselves outside the actively developing "hybrid world" and to one degree or another be excluded from public life, thereby moving to the periphery (marginalizing). When studying the processes of possible marginalization of a part of the population in the context of the intensive development of the digital environment, it is important to take into account the dangers and risks of sociotechnical convergence contributing to this phenomenon.

Currently, there are different points of view on how to sociologically identify the dangers and risks associated with the digital transformation process. As the analysis shows, danger should be considered as the presence of factors that have a dysfunctional, destructive and / or destabilizing effect on human life in a digital society, and risk as the exposure of the negative impact of dangers on a person, his consciousness and behavior. In the course of the conducted research, it was established that the main risks of sociotechnical convergence are technical and technological, sociotechnical risks and risks of social vulnerability. Awareness of the high probability of one of these risks leads to the fact that people begin to limit their use of digital devices, services and technologies, and sometimes completely abandon them. As a result, they find themselves on the edge of the digital world, depriving themselves of a higher quality of life.

Based on expert assessments, it should be stated that the most significant technical and technological risks are the failure of services, accompanied by leaks of personal data, as well as the destruction of the user's digital profile, leading to the loss of all his personal data. Thus, the technical security of using digital services becomes critically important, and in its absence, people tend to either limit the use of digital technologies or abandon them, which also contributes to their marginalization. Expert assessments allow us to recognize the fact that the process of marginalization is increasing due to sociotechnical risks that manifest themselves as deviant behavior of individual participants in the hybrid space. These participants use the technical and technological capabilities of this space for personal enrichment at the expense of vulnerable, marginalized segments of the population, thereby reinforcing their rejection of the new hybrid world. Expert assessments show that the social risks that exacerbate the process of marginalization are internal resistance to change, lack of skills and knowledge to use digital devices, technologies and services, as well as the lack of necessary technical means to work with them.