Towards a Socioeconomics of Hype: Hype Dynamics and Symbolic Boundary Work Within the Speculative AI Bubble

Abstract

Drawing on interviews with 37 entrepreneurs, engineers, technologists and investors in the New York City tech scene involved in AI, we investigate the social formations that characterize “AI-hype” from the perspective of micro-level economic sociology. We observe how actors in New York draw symbolic boundaries between their own work and that of “hype-beasts” in San Francisco, despite drawing upon and profiting from the same sociotechnical imaginaries about AI’s transformative potential. We show how this symbolic boundary work serves to legitimate the local ecosystem, to provide moral valuations for the exchange of capital, to ground different temporalities that inspire urgency in their work, and to enact spatial boundaries amid competing sociotechnical imaginaries. We demonstrate how these contestations contribute to the construction of powerful relevant social groups and their respective technological systems. We thus use the case of AI to take steps toward developing a sociology of hype, drawing on literature in the sociology of technology, boundary work in the professions, and economic sociology.

Keywords

sociology social organization anthropology research methodologies history

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ali

S. J.

Christin

Smart

Katila

(2023). Walking the walk of AI ethics: Organizational challenges and the individualization of risk among ethics entrepreneurs. Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 217–226). https://doi.org/10.1145/3593013.3593990

Appadurai

. (1990). Disjuncture and difference in the global cultural economy. Theory, culture & society, 7(2–3), 295–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276900070020

Baldwin

(2018). In digital we trust: Bitcoin discourse, digital currencies, and decentralized network fetishism. Palgrave Communications, 4(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0065-0

Bandelj

(2012). Relational work and economic sociology. Politics & Society, 40(2), 175–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329212441597

Bandelj

(2020). Relational work in the economy. Annual Review of Sociology, 46(1), 251–272. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054719

Bandelj

Morgan

P. J.

Sowers

(2015). Hostile worlds or connected lives? Research on the interplay between intimacy and economy: Intimacy and economy. Sociology Compass, 9(2), 115–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12242

Beckert

(2016). Imagined futures. Harvard Univ. Press.

Beckert

Bronk

(Eds.), (2018). Uncertain futures: Imaginaries, narratives, and calculation in the economy (New product edition). Oxford University Press.

Benjamin

(2019). Race after technology: Abolitionist tools for the New Jim Code (1st ed.). Polity.

10.

Block

(2012). Relational work in market economies. Politics & Society, 40(2), 135–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329212441576

11.

Bohner

(2025). Drawing the line: Boundary-making, hype, and the economic sociology of AI entrepreneurship [senior thesis]. Princeton University.

12.

Borup

Brown

Konrad

Lente

H. V.

(2006). The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18(3–4), 285–298. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537320600777002

13.

Brayne

Christin

(2021). Technologies of crime prediction: The reception of algorithms in policing and criminal courts. Social Problems, 68(3), 608–624. https://doi.org/10.1093/socpro/spaa004

14.

Brown

Michael

(2003a). A sociology of expectations: Retrospecting prospects and prospecting retrospects. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/0953732032000046024

15.

Brown

Michael

(2003b). The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 15(1), 3–18.

16.

Brown

Rappert

Webster

(Eds.), (2000). Contested futures: A sociology of prospective techno-science. Ashgate.

17.

Buolamwini

(2023). Unmasking AI: My mission to protect what is human in a world of machines. Random House.

18.

Burri

R. V.

(2008). Doing distinctions: Boundary work and symbolic capital in radiology. Social Studies of Science, 38(1), 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312707082021

19.

Callon

(Ed.), (1998). Laws of the markets. Blackwell.

20.

Callon

(2007). What does it mean to say that economics is performative? In: MacKenzie

D. A.

Muniesa

Siu

(Eds.), Do economists make markets? On the performativity of economics (pp. 311–357). Princeton University Press.

21.

Cameron

L. D.

(2024). The making of the “good bad” job: How algorithmic management manufactures consent through constant and confined choices. Administrative Science Quarterly, 69(2), 458–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392241236163

22.

Castilla

E. J.

Hwang

Granovetter

M. S.

(2000). Social networks in Silicon Valley. In Lee

C.-M.

(Ed.), The Silicon Valley edge: A habitat for innovation and entrepreneurship (pp. 218–247). Stanford University Press.

23.

Chan

A. S.

(2014). Networking peripheries: Technological futures and the myth of digital universalism. The MIT Press.

24.

Chateau

Devine-Wright

Wills

(2021). Integrating sociotechnical and spatial imaginaries in researching energy futures. Energy Research & Social Science, 80, Article 102207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102207

25.

Christin

(2022). Metrics at work: Journalism and the contested meaning of algorithms. Princeton University Press.

26.

Cruz

T. M.

Park

Moore

Chen

Gordillo

(2023). Algorithms in the margins: Organized community resistance to port automation in the Los Angeles harbor area. Engaging Science, Technology, and Society, 9(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2023.933

27.

Davis

J. L.

Williams

Yang

M. W.

(2021). Algorithmic reparation. Big Data & Society, 8(2), Article 20539517211044808. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211044808

28.

DiMaggio

(1993). Cultural boundaries and structural change: The extension of the high culture model to theater, opera, and the dance, 1900-1940. In Lamont

Fournier

(Eds.), Cultivating differences: Symbolic boundaries and the making of inequality (pp. 232–256). University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo3628644.html

29.

Durkheim

É.

(2008). The elementary forms of religious life. Cosman

Cladis

M. S.

(Trans.), Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1912).

30.

Epstein

C. F.

(1993). Tinker-bells and pinups: The construction and reconstruction of gender boundaries at work. In Lamont

Fournier

(Eds.), Cultivating differences: Symbolic boundaries and the making of inequality (pp. 232–256). University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo3628644.html

31.

Eubanks

(2018). Automating Inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police and punish the poor. St Martin’s Press.

32.

Fourcade

Healy

(2007). Moral Views of Market Society. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 285–311. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.33.040406.131642

33.

Gieryn

T. F.

(1983). Boundary-Work and the demarcation of science from non-science: Strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists. American Sociological Review, 48(6), 781–795. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095325

34.

Gieryn

T. F.

(1999). Cultural boundaries of science: Credibility on the line. University of Chicago Press.

35.

Granovetter

(1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510. https://doi.org/10.1086/228311

36.

Gray

M. L.

Suri

(2019). Ghost work: How to stop Silicon Valley from building a new global underclass. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

37.

Grohmann

(2023). Objects of virtue: ‘Moral grandstanding’ and the capitalization of ethics under neoliberal commodity fetishism. Journal of Critical Realism, 22(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767430.2022.2095120

38.

Hautala

Ahlqvist

(2024). Integrating futures imaginaries, expectations and anticipatory practices: Practitioners of artificial intelligence between now and future. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 36(9), 2100–2112. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2022.2130041

39.

Huang

L. T.-L.

Chen

H.-Y.

Lin

Y.-T.

Huang

T.-R.

Hung

T.-W.

(2022). Ameliorating algorithmic bias, or why explainable AI needs feminist philosophy. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2022.3/4.14347

40.

Irani

(2019). Hype, profit, labor, and agency in the shadows of the fourth Industrial revolution. Medium: What’s at Stake in a 4th Industrial Revolution?. https://medium.com/whats-at-stake-in-a-fourth-industrial-revolution/hype-profit-labor-and-agency-in-the-shadows-of-the-fourth-industrial-revolution-509afd51a82c

41.

Jasanoff

Kim

S.-H.

(Eds.), (2015). Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. The University of Chicago Press.

42.

Joyce

Cruz

T. M.

(2024). A Sociology of artificial intelligence: Inequalities, power, and data justice. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 10, Article 23780231241275393. https://doi.org/10.1177/23780231241275393

43.

LaGrandeur

(2024). The consequences of AI hype. AI and Ethics, 4(3), 653–656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-023-00352-y

44.

Lamont

(2012). Toward a Comparative Sociology of Valuation and Evaluation. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 201–221.

45.

Lamont

Molnár

(2002). The Study of boundaries in the social Sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28(1), 167–195. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141107

46.

Liu

(2015). Boundary work and exchange: The formation of a professional service market. Symbolic Interaction, 38(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/symb.137

47.

MacKenzie

D. A.

(2006). An engine, not a camera: How financial models shape markets. MIT Press.

48.

Marx

(2010). Capital: A critique of political economy. Madison Park.

49.

Marx

Dragstedt

J. A.

(1976). Value: Studies. New Park Publications; distributed by Labor Publications.

50.

Metcalf

Crawford

(2016). Where are human subjects in big data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data & Society, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716650211

51.

Metcalf

Moss

boyd

danah.

(2019). Owning ethics: Corporate logics, Silicon Valley, and the institutionalization of ethics. Social Research: An International Quarterly, 86(2), 449–476. https://doi.org/10.1353/sor.2019.0022

52.

Miconi

(2024). On digital fetishism: A critique of the big data paradigm. Critical Sociology, 50(4–5), 629–642. https://doi.org/10.1177/08969205231202873

53.

Muniesa

Callon

(2007). Economic experiments and the construction of markets. In MacKenzie

Siu

(Eds.), Do economists make markets? On the performativity of economics (pp. 163–189). Princeton University Press.

54.

Nee

Swedberg

(Eds.), (2005). The economic sociology of capitalism. Princeton University Press.

55.

Neff

(2012). Venture labor: Work and the burden of risk in innovative industries. MIT Press.

56.

Noble

S. U.

(2017). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.

57.

O’Neil

(2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy (1st ed.). Crown.

58.

Orr

Davis

J. L.

(2020). Attributions of ethical responsibility by Artificial Intelligence practitioners. Information, Communication & Society, 23(5), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2020.1713842

59.

Pinch

J Bijker

(1984). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399–441. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312840140030

60.

Roose

(2023). This A.I. subculture’s motto: Go, Go, Go. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/technology/ai-acceleration.html

61.

Saxenian

(1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in Silicon Valley and route 128. Harvard University Press.

62.

Shestakofsky

(2024). Behind the startup: How venture capital shapes work, innovation, and inequality. University of California Press.

63.

Sloane

(2022). To make AI fair, here’s what we must learn to do. Nature, 605(7908), 9. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01202-3

64.

Sloane

Danks

Moss

(2024). Tackling AI hyping. AI and Ethics, 4(3), 669–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00481-y

65.

Sloane

Moss

Awomolo

Forlano

(2022). Participation is not a design fix for machine learning. Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Equity and Access in Algorithms, Mechanisms, and Optimization (pp. 1–6). https://doi.org/10.1145/3551624.3555285

66.

Suchman

(2022). Imaginaries of omniscience: Automating intelligence in the US Department of Defense. Social Studies of Science, 53(5), 761–786. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127221104938

67.

Suchman

(2023). The uncontroversial ‘thingness’ of AI. Big Data & Society, 10(2), Article 20539517231206794. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231206794

68.

Suchman

Trigg

R. H.

(1993). Artificial intelligence as craftwork. In Chaiklin

Lave

(Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 144–178). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625510.007

69.

Theoharakis

Voliotis

Pollack

J. M.

(2021). Going down the slippery slope of legitimacy lies in early-stage ventures: The role of moral disengagement. Journal of Business Ethics, 172, 673–690. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.715478

70.

van Lente

(2012). Navigating foresight in a sea of expectations: Lessons from the sociology of expectations. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 24(8), 769–782. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2012.715478

71.

Vaughan

(1996). The Challenger launch decision: Risky technology, culture, and deviance at NASA. University Of Chicago Press.

72.

Vertesi

Goldstein

Enriquez

Liu

Miller

K. T.

(2020). Pre-Automation: Insourcing and automating the gig economy. Sociologica, 14(3). Article 3. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1971-8853/11657

73.

Weber

(1968). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Roth

Wittich

Fischoff

(Trans.), Bedminster Press.

74.

Wherry

F. F.

(2012). The culture of markets. Polity.

75.

Wherry

F. F.

(2014). Analyzing the culture of markets. Theory and Society, 43(3), 421–436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-014-9218-3

76.

Wimmer

(2008). The making and unmaking of ethnic boundaries: A multilevel process theory. American Journal of Sociology, 113(4), 970–1022. https://doi.org/10.1086/522803

77.

Zelizer

V. A.

(2005a). Circuits within capitalism. In Nee

Swedberg

(Eds.), The economic sociology of capitalism (pp. 289–321). Princeton University Press.

78.

Zelizer

V. A.

(2005b). The purchase of intimacy. Princeton University Press.

79.

Zelizer

V. A.

(2010). Circuits in economic life. In Zelizer

V. A.

(Ed.), Economic lives: How culture shapes the economy (pp. 127–152). Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.23943/princeton/9780691139364.003.0017

80.

Zelizer

V. A.

(2012). How I became a relational economic sociologist and what does that mean? Politics & Society, 40(2), 145–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329212441591