July 2002 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Re: [Air-l] Great Ethical disasters in Internet Research?
by Ildiko Kaposi 12 Jul '02

12 Jul '02

Hi, To Chris's concern about the resentment chat room and newsgroup participants may feel about intrusive researchers: It seems to me that the issue is whether such online forms of expression are considered public or private. (I remember seeing something along these lines in the AoIR archives but I'm not sure what it was exactly - sorry if I repeat other people's ideas.) In my own research on a Hungarian online discussion forum, the majority of the participants I talk to understand the messages they send to be public. They think many of the same rules apply to those messages as to any other publicly accessible media text. And newspapers have published collections of quotes from the site, not even changing the nicks of participants. (I still offer everyone total anonymity, trying to make sure no quotes can be traced back to individuals unless that's their expressed wish.) Bottom line is: there may be cultural differences too in how the public/private nature of online communication we research is determined, and that can affect the research method. Which is not to say there's no need to try to figure out the universal ethics of the area. Ildiko Kaposi

1 0

COSIGN 2002 registration open
by Andy Clarke 12 Jul '02

12 Jul '02

Registration is now open for COSIGN 2002, the Second International Conference on Computational Semiotics for Games and New Media, which will be held at the University of Augsburg (Augsburg , Germany) on the 2nd - 4th September, 2002. As with last year's event, COSIGN provides a dynamic mix of accademic papers and artistic presentations and allocates enough time for vital and vibrant discussions. Innovative in both content and presentation, this cross-disciplinary conference explores the ways in which semiotics (and related theories such as structuralism and post-structuralism) can be applied to creating and analysing computer systems. Details of the programme are available on the following web page: http://www.kinonet.com/conferences/cosign2002/program.html There are "early bird" rates for those booking before the 22nd July 2002 and also reduced rates for students. Rates are as follows: For registration before 22nd July 2002 - Standard Rate ........ 250 Euro - Student Rate ........ 200 Euro Registration after 22nd July 2002 - Standard Rate ........ 350 Euro - Student Rate ........ 250 Euro Register by downloading the registration form in Word format from: http://www.kinonet.com/conferences/cosign2002/COSIGN 2002.doc or PDF format from: http://www.kinonet.com/conferences/cosign2002/COSIGN 2002.pdf and faxing it to Dr Elisabeth Andre on the following number: +49 821 598 2349 Please direct any questions regarding the conference registration and programme to Elisabeth André <andre(a)informatik.uni-augsburg.de> and/or Frank Nack <Frank.Nack(a)cwi.nl>

1 0

Great Ethical disasters in Internet Research?
by Dr Chris Mann 12 Jul '02

12 Jul '02

Hi! Thanks for the interesting responses so far to the Great Ethical Disasters thread. Frank raised a very interesting point when he said he'd ' like to have some objectives, some scales linked to the objectives' before assessing if something is ethical. To this I'd say 'yes-exactly- but what kind of objectives would we be talking about? Is something ethical in terms of its OWN research objectives - or are there general objectives which apply to all studies? Do other people who are aware of the Rimm study think it's ethical/unethical - and, if so, why?? I also want to pick up on the debate started by David Silver who seems to be making a distinction between 'unethical research' and ' methodologically flawed' research. Personally i'd argue that while the use of an appropriate research methodology may seem morally neutral in fact the way a research project is designed is crucial to its moral acceptability. If a research method doesnt succeed in answering the question posed then it wastes resources or if it gives incorrect data then bad theory or practice may be established. (Clare Foster in a book called The Ethics of Medical Research on Humans, 2001, argues this very well). In my opinion assessing the validity of data generated by the Internet is an ethical as well as a methodological challenge. Also, in a new research area like the Internet, you could argue that researchers have moral obligations to the research community. If the researcher is careless or lacks expertise, disillusioned arespondents may no longer be willing to participate in research projects. Some commentators have raised the issue of enthusiastic well meaning DIY types who collect data using the new fun toy that is the internet. These people may not know the ethical rules of professional and other bodies so may unwittingly break them. Research instruments may be badly designed and promises made to recipients may not be fulfilled adding to feelings of disillusionment and alarm. It could be argued that researchers who are guilty of negligence are acting in ways that will harm others not just the individuals they are working with but also because they close down opportunities for valuable Internet research to be conducted in the future. We're all starting to be aware that increasingly chat rooms and newsgroups are starting to resent the intrusion of researchers who they feel come in and strip the assets of the group. I personally think that a research method which leaves behind bad feeling among participants is morally suspect! What do other people think about this??? Cheers chris

1 0

Ethical Disasters? in Internet Research
by Stuart Offenbach 12 Jul '02

12 Jul '02

Dr. Frank Thomas asked what made Rimm's study unethical. Several things. First, readers may review some aspects of the study in an article by Fowler in AAAS's Professional Ethics Report (Fowler, A. (1995), CMU Pornography Study, Professional Ethics Report, 7(3), pp. 1 and 6.) The 'controversy' started with Martin Rimm's report of a study published in the Georgetown Law Journal. Rimm was an undergraduate EE student at Carnegie Melon University and was funded by 4 CMU grants. The purpose of the study was to determine how pornographers use computer system to market their services. As part of the study, Rimm tracked on-line activities of CMU students, staff, and faculty to determine the amount of pornographic material downloaded. Rimm did not obtain or receive consent, nor did he (apparently) have explicit permission from his faculty mentor to carry out these aspects of the study. The report was considered the first "egregious" example of "cybersnooping," and many saw it as a clear violation of privacy rights. (I filed my outline and notes in my ethics/privacy folder). I don't know if this study is infamous, nor if it has been published in a peer reviewed journal other than the Georgetown Law Journal. Other readers in this group can probably cite sources and web sites that discuss the study. Stuart I. Offenbach Department of Psychological Sciences Purdue University

1 0

Re: [Air-l] Great Ethical disasters in Internet Research?
by Lachlan Brown 12 Jul '02

12 Jul '02

.> i can't be the first one to note that ethical flaws (and i'm thinking > critically about attributing any intentionality here) seem to be > operationalized methods flaws...any thoughts on where this discussion has > already taken place? Why, yes, of course. But criticism by Susan Buchman of Judith Kleinfeld's research in MIT's famous gender study clearly delves into para-scholarly questions and quickly reveals the limits of both scientific methodology and ethical or broader social and cultural considerations. The outcome was a sort of pie fight. See below. I think the point is that any research must be clear on the boundaries of its 'meta discourse', which is why the methodology of broadly speaking cultural studies, speaking as it does to and from broader cultural concerns is such a productive, yea even, incisive one. Even where power accumulations appear safe from scrutiny. It takes power and its uneven distribution as one of its subjects. The social compact is maintained through a reflexivity of the researcher concerning her or his assumptions and subjectivity (which is partly why the study is undertaken in the first place, to know oneself in the world) as well as a thoroughgoing analysis of the field of study. External elements, independent agencies, are only admitted where long established codes of ethics are breached. Society ultimately steps in, even as many many executives of IT companies are presently finding out, even where society or the idea of society was not factored into their equations or projections for an IT revolution. The crucial thing is the 'meta-discourse' in which methodology resides or rather the inter-relationship between what we scholars (I use the term in a catholic and informal sense here in AIR) consider appropriate methodology and what the ethical requirement of professional life, as well as society and culture at large demands of us. Yes, very interresting. I would welcome further thoughs on 'operationalised methods flaws' Lachlan Brown Centre for Cultural Studies and the Centre for Urban and Community Research, Goldsmiths College University of London. LETTER The Flaws in MIT�s Gender Study In �Twenty Irrelevant Pages,� Susan Buchman critiques my study, �MIT Tarnishes Its Reputation with Junk Gender Science� . Buchman asks a fair question: Why does the MIT study �fall below the most elementary standards for scientific evidence�? Here is the way a study of gender discrimination at MIT should have been conducted following elementary standards for evidence in the social sciences: 1. An independent research firm should have been engaged to do the study. The chair of the MIT committee evaluating the charge of gender discrimination was Professor Hopkins herself, the chief complainant. Two-thirds of the committee members were other senior women in the School of Science, interested parties who would personally profit from a finding of gender discrimination and, in fact, did profit. The senior women at MIT were thus judge and jury of their own complaints. 2. The independent research firm would have developed a clear conceptualization of discrimination and operationalized that definition with specific measures, e.g. unequal pay, unequal laboratory space, not listened to in meetings, not appointed to prestigious committees, a sense of disrespect. 3. A comparative study of male and female faculty at MIT would be conducted to see if female faculty differ significantly from male faculty in such resources and feelings. Male faculty may have comparable perceptions of marginalization but lack a socially acceptable label like �gender discrimination� to discuss the problem. 4. The data would be coded by researchers who have received training in the category system and who have reached at least an 80 percent level of agreement in coding accuracy. Subtle personal experiences (qualitative data) can be coded scientifically, not only quantitative data, when concepts are clear. 5. The study methods and results would be published for review and critique by the scientific community. If sex differences were found in laboratory space, for example, were differences in seniority taken into account? For MIT to argue that �confidentiality� is required on such matters as sex differences in square feet of laboratory feet is just plain absurd. Confidentiality means you do not identify individuals, not that you do not publish tables. This is how social science is done. A secret study is how politics is done. Judith Kleinfeld Professor of Psychology University of Alaska Fairbanks www-tech.mit.edu/V119/N69/Judith_Kle.69l.html > a tangent to david and quentin's conversation below: does anyone else notice > the entanglement of methods flaws and ethical flaws in the body of internet > research literature they review for their research? i feel like i encounter > it often in work dealing with sexuality and identity in relation to CMC. > > i can't be the first one to note that ethical flaws (and i'm thinking > critically about attributing any intentionality here) seem to be > operationalized methods flaws...any thoughts on where this discussion has > already taken place? > > best, > mary > _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._ > Mary L. Gray <mlgray(a)ucsd.edu> > Department of Communication > University of California, San Diego > vox: 502/451.5003 > mail: PO Box 4004, Louisville, KY 40204 > http://weber.ucsd.edu/~mgray > -.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- > > > From: david silver <dsilver(a)u.washington.edu> > > Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 12:44:17 -0700 (PDT) > > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > Subject: Re: [Air-l] Great Ethical disasters in Internet Research? > > > > Quentin, > > > > i mentioned the HomeNet study because it seems to me that it qualifies as > > one of the major controversies in internet research that chris and > > christian are seeking. my point about the methodologically flawed aspect > > was less a critique of the methods (i'm hardly an expert on the > > quantitative analysis put forth by the authors) and more to the point that > > the controversy was methodologically-based rather than ethically-based. i > > could easily be wrong though and would like to hear more from others. > > > > david silver > > > > On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Quentin (Gad) Jones wrote: > > > >> I have read on a number of occasions attacks on the HomeNet studies for > >> poor methodology. I am yet to read in these same messages details as to > >> why considering the claims that were REALLY made by the researchers as > >> to why the research was so "Flawed". The depression claim was not made > >> as the journalists wrote. Nearly all research is flawed, the question > >> then is relative. Perhaps David would like to explain why HomeNet is > >> particularly flawed research. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Air-l mailing list > > Air-l(a)aoir.org > > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Air-l mailing list > Air-l(a)aoir.org > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > -- __________________________________________________________ Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup Save up to $160 by signing up for NetZero Platinum Internet service. http://www.netzero.net/?refcd=N2P0602NEP8

1 0

hacktivism research in Germany
by Alexandra Samuel 11 Jul '02

11 Jul '02

Hi all, I¹m a Ph.d. candidate in PoliticalScience at Harvard, where I¹m working on a dissertation about hacktivism (the phenomenon of politically motivated computer hacking). As part of my dissertation research, I am going to spend a couple of months next spring/summer (2003) in Germany, conducting research on the Computer Chaos Club, a prominent German hacker organization. I am hoping to find a research institute or university department that I can use as a home base while I am in Germany, ideally in Berlin. I don¹t need an office, and I am happy to lecture or provide research support I have taught, written, and consulted extensively on e-politics/e-democracy so have some knowledge and research skills to offer. I am also reasonably functional in German. But it would be very helpful to have some sort of academic affiliation while in Germany. Does anyone have a suggestion, or interest in having an Internet-oriented colleague for a couple of months? More info on my research and background is available on my web site at http://www.alexandrasamuel.com. Thanks in advance for any advice. Alex -- Alexandra Samuel alex(a)alexandrasamuel.com http://www.alexandrasamuel.com 3223 West 2nd Avenue Vancouver, BC V6K 1K9 Canada tel. 604-731-5445 cel. 604-726-5445 fax. 604-731-5401

1 0

RE: Web-based Surveys (Vishwanath, Arun)
by Sebastian Baumeister 11 Jul '02

11 Jul '02

hi lon berquist, have a look at www.websm.org and http://www.or.zuma-mannheim.de/ good free tools are: rst (www.hinner.com) or wfg (www.online-forschung.de) sebastian baumeister air-l-request(a)aoir.org schrieb: > Send Air-l mailing list submissions to > air-l(a)aoir.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > air-l-request(a)aoir.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > air-l-admin(a)aoir.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Air-l digest..." > > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. brisbane visit/aoir get together (jeremy hunsinger) > 2. list of lists ... (david silver) > 3. Re: list of lists ... (Ben Davidson) > 4. RE: Web-based Surveys (Vishwanath, Arun) > > --__--__-- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 12:30:05 -0400 > Cc: fibreculture(a)lists.myspinach.org > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > From: jeremy hunsinger <jhuns(a)vt.edu> > Subject: [Air-l] brisbane visit/aoir get together > Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > I'll be in brisbane from the 12th through 14th and than at > http://www.uq.edu.au/gsm/biomediaindex.html until i leave on the 18th. > If any of you would like to get together and have an Association of > Internet Researcher's Meet and Greet, drop me a note via e-mail and I'll > see what we can do to set one up. If we can't set one up for everyone, > we could possibly do a few small ones. Nonetheless, if you are > interested in getting together and talking about AoIR, or your own > internet related research, let me know and send me an e-mail off list to > jhuns(a)vt.edu. I'd love to see what you're doing and chat about > possibilities. > > your faithful air-exec-board member;) > > jeremy hunsinger > jhuns(a)vt.edu > on the ibook > www.cddc.vt.edu > www.cddc.vt.edu/jeremy > www.dromocracy.com > > --__--__-- > > Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 7 Jul 2002 15:13:16 -0700 (PDT) > From: david silver <dsilver(a)u.washington.edu> > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > Subject: [Air-l] list of lists ... > Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > Folks, > > after much work and anticipation, we are excited to announce the launch of > the "list of lists" web site. the site is a modest attempt to find and > collect listservs and mailing lists devoted to internet research. we > haven't found them all but it's a start. enjoy: > > http://www.aoir.org/list.php > > (this project was built with the support of the association for internet > researchers. much of the content was generated collaboratively and we > wish to thank the many contributions from the following air-l list > members: Danah Boyd, Jeremy Crampton, Max Doelling, Hans Klein, Joan > Korenman, Randy Kluver, Michel Menou, Jason Rutter, Lois Ann Scheidt, and > Nancy White.) > > Matt Allen > Ulla Bunz > Jeremy Hunsinger > David Silver > > --__--__-- > > Message: 3 > From: "Ben Davidson" <bendavidson(a)totalise.co.uk> > To: <air-l(a)aoir.org> > Subject: Re: [Air-l] list of lists ... > Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 08:36:02 +0100 > Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > Looks excellent. > > There are several resources listed there I didn't know about which look like > they'll be extremely valuable. > > Many thanks all of you. > > Ben > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "david silver" <dsilver(a)u.washington.edu> > To: <air-l(a)aoir.org> > Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2002 11:13 PM > Subject: [Air-l] list of lists ... > > > Folks, > > > > after much work and anticipation, we are excited to announce the launch of > > the "list of lists" web site. the site is a modest attempt to find and > > collect listservs and mailing lists devoted to internet research. we > > haven't found them all but it's a start. enjoy: > > > > http://www.aoir.org/list.php > > > > (this project was built with the support of the association for internet > > researchers. much of the content was generated collaboratively and we > > wish to thank the many contributions from the following air-l list > > members: Danah Boyd, Jeremy Crampton, Max Doelling, Hans Klein, Joan > > Korenman, Randy Kluver, Michel Menou, Jason Rutter, Lois Ann Scheidt, and > > Nancy White.) > > > > Matt Allen > > Ulla Bunz > > Jeremy Hunsinger > > David Silver > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Air-l mailing list > > Air-l(a)aoir.org > > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > > --__--__-- > > Message: 4 > From: "Vishwanath, Arun" <avishwan(a)indiana.edu> > To: "'air-l(a)aoir.org'" <air-l(a)aoir.org> > Subject: RE: [Air-l] Web-based Surveys > Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2002 08:07:01 -0500 > Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > Scott > Could you send me a reprint of your review on web based software packages. I > was particularly interested in the SPSS mrInterview, last year it was still > in beta testing. > Thank you > > Arun Vishwanath, PhD > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott_Crawford(a)marketstrategies.com > [mailto:Scott_Crawford@marketstrategies.com] > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2002 11:28 AM > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > Subject: Re: [Air-l] Web-based Surveys > > I recently wrote a review of three software packages. The packages were > chosen to represent three "kinds" of web survey systems. The three > included Perseus SurveySolutions for the Web 4.0, zTelligence 2.0, and SPSS > mrInterview. The review is in press... due to be released in the August > 2002 edition of Field Methods. Full citation as follows: > > Crawford, S. (2002) "Evaluation of Web Survey Data Collection Systems." > Field Methods. Vol. 14, No. 3. August. pp. 349-363. > > If you are interested, let me know and I'd be glad to send you a reprint > when you get them. > > But in summary... there are a lot of low cost web survey systems out there. > However, the adage "You get what you pay for." definitely applies in this > area. And that is enhanced by the fact that the more it costs, the more > complex/robust/capable the system is... which means the support costs (in > internet infrastructure and people) greatly increase. Organizations that > committ to maintaining a high quality web survey system with the proper > infrastructure to support it shell out over $100k annually to do so. > > Because of this cost, another alternative (outsourcing), becomes very > attractive for those who need to do web surveys to high academic standards, > but don't have the volume to justify such an infrastructure. > > SC > > ********************************** > Scott Crawford > Research Director - Social Science Research > http://www.ms-interactive.com > 734/542-7796 > 734/661-0323 (fax) > > > > Berquist(a)uts.cc. > > utexas.edu To: air-l(a)aoir.org > > Sent by: cc: > > air-l-admin@aoir Subject: [Air-l] Web-based > Surveys > .org > > > > > > 06/28/2002 11:42 > > AM > > Please respond > > to air-l > > > > > > A few months ago, there was some discussion about online > surveys--particularly > regarding methodology and design. My question is more practical--can > anyone > recommend software to design a web-displayed survey that will easily > capture > data into a backend database? I've looked at SPSS Data Entry (TM), but > would > like to receive recommendations from others who have completed web-. > > based > surveys and are pleased with the software they have worked with. > > Thanks, > > Lon Berquist > Telecommunications and Information Policy Institute > The University of Texas at Austin > > _______________________________________________ > Air-l mailing list > Air-l(a)aoir.org > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > > _______________________________________________ > Air-l mailing list > Air-l(a)aoir.org > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > > --__--__-- > > _______________________________________________ > Air-l mailing list > Air-l(a)aoir.org > http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l > > End of Air-l Digest

1 0

FW: FQS 3(2) "Using Technology in the Qualitative Research Process" online
by Charlie Breindahl 09 Jul '02

09 Jul '02

Dear All, The 8th issue of the online journal FQS -- "Using Technology in the Qualitative Research Process" -- is now available at http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm In addition to the articles, linked directly to the topic, you will also find selected single contributions, review essays and review notes. Enjoy reading, and we are looking forward to your response: all kinds of critique, comments, suggestions and support are warmly welcomed! Katja Mruck *********************************************************************** A) FQS 3(2) USING TECHNOLOGY IN THE QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PROCESS Edited by Graham R. Gibbs, Susanne Friese & Wilma C. Mangabeira The following contributions are available online: F Full text, A Abstract E English, F French, G German, S Spanish Graham R. Gibbs, Susanne Friese & Wilma C. Mangabeira: The Use of New Technology in Qualitative Research. Introduction to Issue 3(2) of FQS (FE, AG, AS) [The German full text will be available in June] Roberta Bampton & Christopher J. Cowton (UK): The E-Interview (FE, AG, AS) Sharon A. Bong (UK): Debunking Myths in Qualitative Data Analysis (FE, AG, AS) Sylvain Bourdon (Canada): The Integration of Qualitative Data Analysis Software in Research Strategies: Resistances and Possibilities (FE, AG, AS) David Brown (UK): Going Digital and Staying Qualitative: Some Alternative Strategies for Digitizing the Qualitative Research Process (FE, AG, AS) Patrick Carmichael (UK): Extensible Markup Language and Qualitative Data Analysis (AE, AG, AS) [The English full text will be available in June] Diógenes Carvajal (Columbia): The Artisan's Tools. Critical Issues when Teaching and Learning CAQDAS (FE, FS, AG) Bibi Holge-Hazelton (Denmark): The Internet: A New Field for Qualitative Inquiry? (FE, AG, AS) Thomas Irion (Germany): Collection, Presentation and Analysis of Multimedia Data with Computers (FG, AE, AS) Anne Marie Kanstrup (Denmark): Picture the Practice-Using Photography to Explore Use of Technology Within Teachers' Work Practices (FE, AG, AS) Sabine C. Koch & Joerg Zumbach (Germany): The Use of Video Analysis Software in Behavior Observation Research: Interaction Patterns in Task-oriented Small Groups (FE, AG, AS) Marc Koerschen, Jessica Pohl, H. Walter Schmitz & Olaf A. Schulte (Germany): New Techniques in Qualitative Conversation Analysis: Computer-based Transcription of Videoconferences (FG, AE, AS) Thorsten Meyer, Harald Gruppe & Michael Franz (Germany): Microsoft Access for the Analysis of Open-ended Responses in Questionnaires and Interviews (FG, AE, AS) Connie M. Moss & Gary Shank (USA): Using Qualitative Processes in Computer Technology Research on Online Learning: Lessons in Change from "Teaching as Intentional Learning" (FE, AG, AS) Bruno Nideroest (Switzerland): Computer-Aided Qualitative Data Analysis with Word (FG, AE, AS) Kathryn A. Roberts & Richard W. Wilson (UK): ICT and the Research Process: Issues Around the Compatibility of Technology With Qualitative Data Analysis (FE, AG, AS) Cory Secrist, Ilse de Koeyer, Holly Bell, & Alan Fogel (USA): Combining Digital Video Technology and Narrative Methods for Understanding Infant Development (FE, FS, AG) Robert Thompson (Australia): Reporting the Results of Computer-assisted Analysis of Qualitative Research Data (FE, AG, AS) Elaine Welsh (UK): Dealing with Data: Using NVivo in the Qualitative Data Analysis Process (FE, AG, AS) Josef Zelger & Andreas Oberprantacher (Austria): Processing of Verbal Data and Knowledge Representation by GABEK®-WinRelan® (AE, AG, AS) [The English full text will be available in June] SINGLE CONTRIBUTION Ronald Hitzler (Germany): The Reconstruction of Meaning. The State of the Art in German Interpretive Sociology (FG, AE, AS) [pre-published: April 2002] FQS REVIEW Guenter Mey: Editorial Note: 2 Years FQS Review: 18 Publishers, 74 Reviews, 3383 Mails (FG, AE, AS) REVIEW ESSAYS Volker Barth (France, Germany): Society as a Dialectical Process - Victor Turner in Between Ndembu and Bob Dylan (FG, AE, AF, AS) [pre-published: Febr. 2002] Jaan Valsiner (USA): Ethnography Lost and Found: Qualitative Methodology Between Science, Art, and Social Powers (FE, AG, AS) [pre-published: Febr. 2002] FQS REVIEW NOTES David Howarth (2000). Discourse reviewed by John Cromby (UK) (FE, AG, AS) [pre-published: April 2002] Stefan Beck (Ed.) (2000). Technogene Naehe. Ethnographische Studien zur Mediennutzung im Alltag [Technogenetic Closeness. Ethnographic Studies on the Use of New Media in Everyday Life] reviewed by Nicola Doering (Germany) (FG, AE, AS) [pre-published: March 2002] Dorothée Ninck Gbeassor, Heidi Schaer Sall, David Signer, Daniel Stutz & Elena Wertli (1999). Ueberlebenskunst in Uebergangswelten: ethnopsychologische Betreuung von Asylsuchenden [The Art of Surviving in Transitional Worlds: Counselling for the Asylum Seekers] reviewed by Victoria Hegner (Germany) (FG, AE, AS) [pre-published: Febr. 2002] Michael Beisswenger (Ed.) (2001). Chat-Kommunikation. Sprache, Interaktion und Sozialitaet in synchroner computervermittelter Kommunikation. Perspektiven auf ein interdisziplinaeres Forschungsfeld [Chat Communication. Language, Interaction, and Sociality in Computer Mediated Communication. Perspectives on an interdisciplinary research area] reviewed by Matthias Petzold (Germany) (FG, AE, AS) [pre-published: March 2002] Thomas Bruesemeister (2000). Qualitative Forschung. Ein Ueberblick [Qualitative Research: An Overview] reviewed by Martin Spetsmann-Kunkel (Germany) (FG, AE, AS) [pre-published: March 2002] B) READERS´ REQUEST "Current research on pedagogy in higher education, especially in the education programs": http://www.qualitative-research.net/discus/messages/18/51.html?1022678659 C) CONFERENCES -> During September 19-21, 2002, the Swiss Sociological Association, Research Committee "Interpretive Sociology" and the European Sociological Association ESA, Research Network "Qualitative Methods" with participation of the RN "Sociology of Arts" are organizing a Conference on "Ethnographic Organizational Studies". Location: University of St. Gallen, Switzerland; Conference Language: English. Information about the conference: http://www.sfs.unisg.ch/org/sfs/web.nsf/wwwPubInhalteGer/Aktuelles?opendocu… -> The Center for Qualitative Psychology is organizing a workshop entitled: "Qualitative Psychology: Research questions and matching methods of analysis." The conference will be held in English during October 25-27, 2002, in Perlora, Spain. Information about the workshop: http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/qualitative-psychologie/1call02.html -- FQS - Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research (ISSN 1438-5627) English -> http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs-eng.htm German -> http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/fqs.htm

2 1

Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award
by Mark D. Johns 09 Jul '02

09 Jul '02

Final Reminder: CALL FOR AWARD APPLICATIONS Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award Sponsored by the Carl Couch Center for Social and Internet Research http://www.cccsir.org/ The Carl Couch Center issues an annual call for student-authored papers to be considered for Carl J. Couch Internet Research Award. The Couch Center welcomes both theoretical and empirical papers that (1) apply symbolic interactionist approaches to Internet studies, (2) demonstrate interactive relationships between social interaction and communication technologies as advocated by Couch, (3) develop symbolic interactionist concepts in new directions. Papers will be evaluated based on the quality of (1) mastery of Symbolic Interactionist approaches and concepts and Couchs theses, (2) originality, (3) organization, (4) presentation, and (5) advancement of knowledge. Evaluation will be administered by a Review Committee of four: Dr. Mark D. Johns, Luther College Dr. Katherine M. Clegg, University of Illinois, Chicago Dr. Lori Kendall, SUNY-Purchase Dr. Shing-Ling S. Chen, University of Northern Iowa Competition is open to graduate or undergraduate students of all disciplines. Works that are published or accepted for publication are not eligible for award consideration. The top three papers will receive Couch Awards to be presented at the 2002 International Conference of the Association of Internet Researchers at the University of Maastricht (the Netherlands), International Institute of Infonomics. The top paper will be awarded a certificate and a cash prize of $150, runner up will receive a certificate and a cash prize of $100, and a third paper will receive a certificate and a cash prize of $50. All three authors will have the opportunity to present their work at a session of the 2002 A.o.I.R. conference. Those interested should send a copy of their paper, with a 100-word abstract, electronically to Mark Johns at johnsmar(a)luther.edu . Application deadline is July 15, 2002. Notification of award will be sent out by September 1. Questions and comments about Couch Award application, please contact: Mark D. Johns Dept. of Communication/Linguistics Luther College Decorah, IA 52101 Tel: (563) 387-1347 E-mail: johnsmar(a)luther.edu

1 0

Fwd: CFP: Mediaterra 2002 - 4th International Art and Technology Festival
by Steve Jones 09 Jul '02

09 Jul '02

>Apologies if you receive this more than once > >Medi@terra 2002 > >4th International Art and Technology Festival > >New Platforms of Spectacle, Communication and Resistance > >6-15 December 2002 > > >Call for projects > >If "the medium was the message", the platform is the message of the >message and the weakening of the message. > >"Platform" is the combination of technology, a new way of thinking >about meeting needs, and the vision of a group of people who are >preparing a "space" in which to invite interested persons to develop >their own ideas. > >If the late 20th century was characterized by McLuhans maxim "the >medium is the message", the beginning of the next one can be >characterized as follows: "We are preparing new platforms for new >messages". > >With these thoughts in mind, and with all possibilities open, we are >exploring and challenging new platforms by touching (or clicking on) >all matters of interest, from growing new pop art (SMS) to the >entertainment field (feature-length video art, interactive theatre) >and technological development (smart agents). > >And finally, in this new situation, given the chance to talk about >the past, we pay homage to individuals or even machines that have >already marked the history of the digital culture. > >We believe that a new idea cannot exist unless it is preceded by a >new platform to host it and this is essentially what determines the >way a society evolves. > >There are times when evolution is characterized by the destruction >of the platform, but not the ideas; and others when even though the >platforms have been torn down, and ideas are homeless, new platforms >are nevertheless created and new ideas generated. > >The period that our culture is now passing through belongs to the >second instance. Therefore, acts of renewal or resistance can be >primarily described as the creation or testing of new platforms and >not dispute of a system that is already as empty as a discarded >snake skin. > >Nor is it accidental, that the word "platform" in the industrial >world describes the space between where you are and the means of >transportation (train, boat) you are about to board to go elsewhere. >To board a plane or boat you must first cross the platform > >The new platforms then are the landing-stages for the long journey >humanity is embarking on... The question is who will be boarding and >who will stay behind and watch the ship pull out > >Manthos Santorineos >Artistic Director of Medi@terra Festival > > >Feature Length Digital Video > >Streaming Video > >The advent of DV technology offers new tools to film and video >makers. These tools are making it possible to produce high quality >films cheaply and independently of the industry monoliths that >currently determine what we can see. The new lightweight cameras, >streaming technology, and DV technology have brought a new lightness >of touch to all aspects of the moving image from production through >to distribution. And a new relationship has been created between >creativity, technology and the digital industry, in the search for a >new aesthetic and financial basis for film and video makers. > >Conditions for entry > > >The work must have been produced within the past two years. > > >Works shall be in English or with English subtitles > > >Just one work per candidate can be accepted in each category > > >The works may have been presented in other festivals. > > >Each work should be accompanied by a. the entry form, b. a synopsis, >c. a short CV of the artist, d. Some stills, images in TIFF or JPEG >mode, submitted in digital format, saved on a floppy, on a CD ROM, >or as email attachments (please note: texts should be in Word for >Windows) > > >Pre-selection will be made by the programming committee for Medi@terra 02. > > >No originals must be submitted, as materials will not be returned. >The works will become part of the Fournos Archive. Artists reserve >all artistic and commercial rights to their works, and for any >future use or presentation of the works, their permission is needed. > > >Fournos and Medi@terra festival reserve the right to publish the >submitted material for the promotion needs of the festival. > > >Please also note the following > >The feature-length digital video should > > >be a minimum of 50 min. > be sent in DV or DVD format. For the preliminary selection VHS >tapes are also accepted. > not be a made-for-TV production. Co-production is accepted. > >The streaming videos should be > > >a maximum of 5-10 min. > sent in DV or DVD format, but also the exact URL location should be >indicated. > > >Artificial Entities > >Since the early nineties, the interdisciplinary fields of art, >science and technology have created a different platform for >research, collaboration and creation. This generates works that >encourage audience participation, continuous change and evolution. >These could be interactive artificial intelligence environments, >autonomous and advanced robotics and intelligent agents. The >features we are looking for are innovation, autonomy, interactivity, >as well as the subjective adjustment and interpretation they suggest >to the user/viewer allowing him to become a user/ co-creator. The >aim of creating autonomous virtual characters that pose and realize >goals, develop actions, are influenced by the changes in the >environment and then adjust it, gives a new dimension in the space >of art. > > >Conditions for entry > > >Each work shall be submitted in one of the following forms: > > >1. video documentation (DV, VHS tape in Pal or Secam). The maximum >length shall be 15 minutes and it should have an English-language >description, either in voice-over narration or accompanying text. > > >2. of an executable (.exe) file saved in a CD ROM, accompanied by a >description and the instructions for use in English > > >3. any type of software that can be run on a "standard" PC, >accompanied by a description and the instructions for use in English. > > > > >Only one work per candidate is accepted in each category. > > >The works may have been presented in other festivals. > > >Each work should be accompanied by a. the entry form, b. a synopsis, >c. a short CV of the artist, d. Some stills, images in TIFF or JPEG >mode and e. a technical description of the work, with a reference to >all the technical requirements that should be met by the steering >committee. > > >Preselection of works will be made by the programming committee of >the festival, representing Medi@terra 02. > > >Fournos and Medi@terra festival reserve the right to publish the >works submitted for the promotion needs of the festival. > > > >Awards >One prize of 9.000 Euros for the best Feature Length Digital Video >One prize of 4.000 Euros for the best project from the Artificial Entities >One prize of 1.500 Euros for the best Streaming Video > > >A call for SMS will also follow soon! > > >Deadline >20 October 2002 > > > >How to participate >Please print attached file or download and print the entry form from >http://www.mediaterra.org and send it along with the material >required for its category to: > >FOURNOS >Center for the Art and the New Technologies >Mavromichali 168 >114 72 Athens >Greece > > >For more information >Please contact Eleni Kouvari, In Charge of Communication by >telephone on +3010 6460748, +3010 6420451 or via email at >info(a)fournos-culture.gr > > > > >Medi@terrra 2002, International Art and Technology Festival is >organized by Fournos, Center for the Art and the New Technologies >and the Hellenic Ministry of Culture. > >Medi@terra 2002 - Steering Committee > >Dodo Santorineos, Director of Fournos & Medi@terra Festival >Manthos Santorineos, Artistic Director of Fournos & Medi@terra Festival >Maria X, Curator of Fournos >Dimos Dimitriou, Artist >John Kontos, Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the Department >of Methodology, History and Theory of Science, U. of Athens >Maria Roussou, Head of the Virtual Reality Department, Foundation of >the Hellenic World >Maria Bouligaraki, Researcher in Information Science, University of Athens >Daphne Dragona, Coordinator for Fournos & Medi@terra Festival > > >Special Advisors >Zoe Kazazaki, Head of the International Organizations Department, >Hellenic Ministry of Culture >Maria Maragou, Director of Rethimnon Contemporary Art Center > > >

1 0