- Air-L - lists.aoir.org

CFP--International Journal of Internet Research Ethics
by Elizabeth Buchanan 11 Feb '08

11 Feb '08

Dear Colleagues, *Special Issue: Research Ethics, Policies, Law: International Perspectives Call for Papers Deadline for Submission: April 15, 2008 * This issue welcomes papers dealing with any aspect of international policy and internet research ethics. Specifically, we are interested in papers from researchers and scholars exploring data protection laws; policies and regulations; and ethical models of research protections. We seek practical, applied discussions – i.e., as informed by and focusing on one or more case studies or real-world examples – as well as theoretical papers. Suitable topics include: reviews of existing research protections laws and policies in specific countries or broader units of analysis such as Scandinavia, the European Union, Africa, South Asia, developing countries, and so forth; reviews of existing laws and policies vis-à-vis emerging technologies; cross-cultural analyses of research ethics and online research; specific analyses of related issues such as privacy, attribution, copyright, ownership, consent models; or discussions of online research in action, such as ethnographies, participant observations, research with/on minors, and discourse/content analyses. *Deadline for Submission: April 15, 2008* Papers may be in the length of 1500-5000 words. Please use the style sheet and submission guidelines outlined below. Authors are encouraged to contact the editors to discuss possible submissions in advance of the deadline. Full submission information is available at http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/SOIS/cipr/ijire/submit.html Best regards, Elizabeth -- Elizabeth A. Buchanan, Ph.D. Director, Center for Information Policy Research School of Information Studies University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee www.cipr.uwm.edu 414.229.3973 Co-Editor, International Journal of Internet Research Ethics (www.ijire.uwm.edu)

1 0

Re: [Air-L] open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals
by Caroline Haythornthwaite 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

Thanks. /C ---- Original message ---- >Date: Sun, 10 Feb 2008 15:49:04 -0500 >From: "McLaughlin, Lisa M. Dr." <mclauglm(a)muohio.edu> >Subject: Re: [Air-L] open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals >To: "air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org" <air-l(a)listserv.aoir.org> > >Blair, Carol, Julie Brown & Leslie Baxter. "Disciplining The >Feminine." Quarterly Journal of Speech 80 (1994): 383-409. > > >On 2/10/08 3:44 PM, "Christian Nelson" <xianknelson(a)mac.com> wrote: > >I can't remember all the details about this case, but I think all >these details are available in the article that resulted from this >flap. Again, that article was published in one of the top >communication journals, so the details are out there. Someone on the >list must remember who the authors were, no? > >On Feb 10, 2008, at 2:03 PM, Caroline Haythornthwaite wrote: > >> Just for curiosity -- and not actually to question your sources on >> this -- but how >> did you find about that "reviewers rejected a paper based on the >> presumed gender >> of the authors." Did they say that in their reviews? and the author >> (s) shared that >> with you? >> >_______________________________________________ >The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ > > >_______________________________________________ >The Air-L(a)listserv.aoir.org mailing list >is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org >Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org > >Join the Association of Internet Researchers: >http://www.aoir.org/ ---------------------------------------- Caroline Haythornthwaite Associate Professor Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 501 East Daniel St., Champaign IL 61820

2 1

open-access - a practical question
by Nicole Ellison 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

I have a question that ties together two recent issues on this thread: peer review and open access. My personal stance: I'd like to see academic research become more freely available online while maintaining peer review. Assuming some of you share these goals, how do we reconcile the common act of putting early-stage work online, either as blog posts/talk cribs (like danah) or as full papers, while maintaining blind peer review? A personal anecdote: Recently I reviewed a paper for a top-tier academic journal and Googled one of the citations to find out more about it. To my surprise I found a copy of the paper I was reviewing, with full authorship information and citation info that claimed it was "In press" at the journal! This is an extreme case, but it seems to me that as more work comes online (e.g. through blog posts or full papers) before the peer-review process is completed, the chance that this work will be reviewed blindly are lessoned. Any thoughts on what practices (for authors, editors, and reviewers) make most sense for balancing the benefits of circulating ideas and work early vs. the goal of maintaining blind review (or what's left of it)? Thanks, Nicole * * * Nicole Ellison, PhD nellison(a)msu.edu

5 4

Re: [Air-L] open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals
by Caroline Haythornthwaite 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

Just for curiosity -- and not actually to question your sources on this -- but how did you find about that "reviewers rejected a paper based on the presumed gender of the authors." Did they say that in their reviews? and the author(s) shared that with you? /Caroline ---------------------------------------- Caroline Haythornthwaite Associate Professor Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 501 East Daniel St., Champaign IL 61820

3 3

Request for Proposals - Internet Research 10.0 (woo-hoo!) / 2009
by Charles Ess 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

Dear all, Please distribute the following as appropriate - and thanks! - charles and mia == Request for Proposals The Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) invites proposals from individuals and institutions interested in serving as the host site for Internet Research 10.0, the AoIR annual conference for 2009. The AoIR Internet Research conferences are among the most important venues for bringing together current research and reflection from a wide range of disciplines and perspectives - with a marked accent on interdisciplinary approaches - on the multiple social and technological practices that depend upon and shape the Internet. IR 10.0 will mark the 10th anniversary of AoIR. We look forward to an intellectually stimulating conference, and one that, in keeping with the distinctive spirit and hospitality of AoIR, will also be a heck of a good time ... (Previous conference cities: Lawrence, Kansas (2000); Minneapolis, Minnesota (2001); Maastricht, the Netherlands (2002); Toronto, Canada (2003); Brighton, U.K. (2004); Chicago, Illinois (2005); Brisbane, Australia (2006); Vancouver, Canada (2007) - and upcoming: Copenhagen, Denmark (2008)). We ask interested colleagues to review the following general proposal requirements. Colleagues and institutions who would like to pursue developing a proposal are encouraged to contact Mia Consalvo (consalvo(a)ohio.edu) and/or Charles Ess (cmess(a)drury.edu) to indicate your interest and raise any immediate questions, etc., that you may wish to discuss. We will also be happy to send you a far more detailed Conference Planning Guide for your review and use. We would ask that a proposal address the following elements: DATES. AoIR conferences typically take place in early-to-mid-October - but depending only local calendars and requirements, we can be somewhat flexible regarding conference timing (i.e., from late September to late October). The AoIR conference typically runs over four days, beginning with 1) an initial day for pre-conference workshops and possible excursions. 2) the program proper, which runs over 3 days. Each day has 6 programmed sessions which require space. Of the 6 each day, three are sessions for papers, panels and roundtables, which require 8 parallel rooms. The remaining three include times for keynote presentations, the AoIR general meeting, Birds of a Feather sessions, etc. (The IR 8.0 / 2007 Program may be downloaded for review: <http://www.sfu.ca/~smith/AOIR-Program-OCT16.pdf>) LOCATION / TRAVEL / VENUE. AoIR members and conference participants are a diverse, international community: conference venues should be easily accessible from international travel hubs. Travel possibilities from international arrival points to accommodations (see below) and conference venue should be convenient and inexpensive. AoIR conferences typically attract 250-400 participants. Hence, there is need for one large auditorium that can comfortably hold ca. 300 people (or more), plus at least 6 smaller rooms for parallel sessions - as well as for requisite infrastructure (AV, wireless, computers and data projectors,etc.) (These may be at a host University and/or in the area (e.g., conference centers, a hotel, etc.) for the conference itself.) ECOLOGY / SUSTAINABILITY We encourage proposals that take into account the ecological impacts of conference arrangements (e.g., preferences for sustainable choices re. conference materials, catering arrangements, distances and travel possibilities, etc.) BUDGET - a _rough_ estimate of local costs, using the outline provided in the planning document sent out upon request. An economically viable conference will also require some level of local / regional / national sponsorships. Suggestions regarding e.g., possible grants, in-kind contributions, potential corporate sponsors, etc. would be helpful. ACCOMMODATIONS and related infrastructure. This should include information about a proposed conference hotel, whether or not it will serve as a conference venue (e.g., in Vancouver, we did _not_ use a hotel as the venue) - as well as information about alternative possibilities, including modest to low-cost possibilities, so far as these are available. CATERING - coffee/tea breaks + conference banquet LOCAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE: the Committee and its Chair are responsible for these and other important details (e.g., local registration process, accounting and documenting expenses and credits in the conference budget, etc.) and ensuring that "everything is in place" prior to and through the conference itself. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - anything else that you think will enhance the conference experience. For example, host venues commonly organize one or more "getaways" that make local highlights easily accessible to conference participants. FOR OUR PART - AoIR will provide a great deal of assistance and direction, including registration and collection of conference fees through the AoIR website; recruiting a Program Chair who will take primary responsibility for soliciting papers and reviewers, oversee the reviewing and notification process, etc. (Organizationally, the Local Organizing Committee works with the Program Chair and AoIR Vice-President and President, who serve as liaisons with the AoIR Executive Committee.) We clearly recognize that hosting an AoIR IR conference is no small task. But as previous conference organizers and local committees will tell you - it is also a highly rewarding experience! Mia and I look forward to receiving your inquiries and proposals. - charles ess (cmess(a)drury.edu) - Mia Consalvo (consalvo(a)ohio.edu)

1 0

Online Communities / Online Social Communities / Virtual Communities of Practice?
by Gerry Mckiernan 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

***APOLOGIES FOR RECEIPT OF DUPLICATE POSTINGS*** Colleagues/ I Need To Tap The Wisdom-Of-The-Web ... I am interested in the Similarities / Differences of the following related Web-phenomena: =Online Communities =Online Social Networks =Virtual Communities of Practice I am also interested in Any and All Significant ***Examples*** And/Or ***Research*** about >>Virtual Communities of Practice<< >>Online Communities<< [I Have Online Social Networks More/Less Covered[:-)] BTW: I am aware of the Most Excellent Work of danah boyd [ http://www.danah.org/ ] ===NOTE: I am particularly interested in examples/research in Science / Technology 'Communities' [especially Chemistry / Physics ] === ---IF POSSIBLE, PLEASE COMMENT ON THE BLOG ENTRY AT--- [ http://onlinesocialnetworks.blogspot.com/2008/02/similaritiesdifferences-of… ] I Will Post A Summary Later This Month Thanks! /Gerry Gerry McKiernan Associate Professor Science and Technology Librarian Iowa State University Library Ames IA 50011 gerrymck(a)iastate.edu There is Nothing More Powerful Than An Idea Whose Time Has Come Victor Hugo [ http://www.blogger.com/profile/09093368136660604490 ] Iowa: Where the Tall Corn Flows and the (North)West Wind Blows ... [ http://www.alternativeenergyblogs.blogspot.com/ ]

2 1

open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals
by Barry Saunders 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

I've wanted to join in this debate for a while, but I've been busy going through the papers for an open-access journal I'm editing, called Media-Culture. I'm working on it with the evil defender of locked-down academic publishing, Jason Wilson, and let me tell you, it's hard. He's all like, let's lock this mofo down and charge access, because only the cool kids deserve to read our awesome articles. MOO HOO HA HAA HAA HA AND WE WILL BE EVIL SENIOR PROFESSORS MOO HOO HA HA HAHA. Ahem. I'm all for open-access. I got into academia via Indymedia. All my work is published on Eprints and/or my blogs, under a CC licence where possible. I do think open-access journals are the way of the future, but we aren't there yet. As Barry Wellman pointed out, running a journal costs money, and sometimes access fees are the only way to get that funding. The example of community media and citizen media is quite illustrative - many publications start out by charging for access to ensure their survival until they can move to a sustainable funding model. Boycotting them will only kill the publication - not a particularly good move for an emerging field. Community media is also illustrative for what happens when the commitment to open-access overtakes everything else - those people who work on the publication are no longer paid, and the people who take over are usually comfortable middle class people who can spare the time to help out. That can mean the difference between a hard hitting, class conscious publication and middle-class pabulum. I'm not so sure that open-editing, which appears to have been suggested here, will work for academic publishing. Wikipedia works, for the most part, because articles there take a neutral point of view. Using wikis for argument, by and large, doesn't work. Wikipedia is for documentation, not argumentation. Open-access argument is Indymedia or sometimes Metafilter. Sometimes interesting, sometimes garbage, rarely above pedestrian. It's also worth noting that doubleblind peer review WORKS. It is one of the few mechanisms available that redresses the gender bias in academic writing. Any open-editing system for academic publications would have to take that into account. http://blogs.nature.com/peer-to-peer/2008/01/doubleblind_peer_review_reveal… Lastly, if this is the level of academic discussion and argumentation that an open, internet-mediated journal would have.... Hoo boy. I've had more elucidating discussions on Digg. -- Barry Saunders ---- http://investigativeblog.net http://gatewatching.org http://d-notice.net ---- PhD Candidate // researcher http://creativeindustries.qut.edu.au http://eprints.qut.edu.au/view/person/Saunders,_Barry.html skype: barry_saunders CRICOS No. 00213J On 10/2/08 2:14 PM, "Christian Nelson" <xianknelson(a)mac.com> wrote: On Feb 9, 2008, at 10:37 PM, Jason Wilson wrote: > a decision to immediately boycott all closed-source journals could > only be premised on a reductive analysis of how academic publishing > works, and by ignoring what the people within this system are > trying to achieve, and more importantly, what they've done already. Oh, how nobly they do strive for us! We should all be ashamed of having suggested otherwise.

6 7

grants in innovative literature and arts
by Jeremy Hunsinger 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

OPEN FOR SUBMISSION: FEBRUARY 4 – MARCH 4, 2008 Please forward widely! If you are working on an exciting emerging fields, literature, or performing arts project we encourage you to apply in our upcoming grant round. For general information and guidelines, please visit:http://creative-capital.org/application/ To apply for a Creative Capital grant, you must first submit an Inquiry Form regarding your project. Tell us about your project and how, in conjunction with a Creative Capital grant, it will be catalytic for your artistic and professional growth. In addition, you will need to describe the influences that inform your work and how your work takes an inventive and original approach to form and content. Be prepared to present a basic budget and to identify the audience(s) for your project and any possible presenting venues. The Guidelines and Inquiry Form for will be available on the Creative Capital website from February 4 to March 4, 2008. It will be available at http://creative-capital.org/application/ found @ http://newmediafix.net/daily/?p=1840 Jeremy Hunsinger Information Ethics Fellow, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee (www.cipr.uwm.edu ) Words are things; and a small drop of ink, falling like dew upon a thought, produces that which makes thousands, perhaps millions, think. --Byron

1 0

Re: [Air-L] open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals
by Jason Wilson 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

"I'm editor of a corporate-owned journal, but I also prefer a model of sustainable open access and independent media [mostly I'm just an academic schlepping through various challenges like everyone else]. I hope that some of us who are editors of journals owned by conglomerates might try to edge the decision-makers toward positioning journals so that access is more freely available and, perhaps eventually, toward changing business-as-usual." Thank you Lisa, for expressing succinctly what the vast majority of us in academe, and academic publishing, try to do. It's impossible to disagree with the claim (which is therefore actually a platitude) that it would be better for everyone if scholarly research were freely available to whomever wanted to use it. I've heard people who actually work in academic publishing say the same thing. But a decision to immediately boycott all closed-source journals could only be premised on a reductive analysis of how academic publishing works, and by ignoring what the people within this system are trying to achieve, and more importantly, what they've done already. It might play well to the crowd, but it also ignores the affordances of the apparatuses of academic publishing - including its capacity to facilitate considered responses to complex problems. The logical extension of a boycott, of course, is not publishing books with closed-source publishers, and indeed not making any appearance in any medium or forum that doesn't relay its content openly, right now. I wonder if people have thought this course of action through, or if they're actually prepared to take this as far as the underlying logic of their argument demands. Working with publishers might actually help to achieve concrete goals like having them open up their massive archives (under conditions of a boycott, where's their incentive to do this?) and crucially it would help to maintain the communities around existing journals. Do we really want a journal like Feminist Media Studies to disappear because of a submissions boycott? Putting it in concrete terms like this might help us actually think about the possible consequences of big ideas like this. Big publishers might be a lot less discomfited - at the level of the bottom line - by the disappearance of some fantastic humanities journals than we'd like to think, and it would mostly be scholars who'd suffer. Isn't it better, more effective, to simply do all you can to support emerging open access journals - including publishing your research there, acting as a peer reviewer, guest editing, like so many of us already do - and at the same time work at encouraging publishers towards open-access (they're heading that way - all they need is a business model - do we really think that they're not apprised of these issues too?). Isn't anything else just grandstanding, or fundamentalism? I'll declare my interest - I'm Reviews Editor of Convergence. That's the journal that danah decided to name in her original post, having just been published in the special issue on Convergence Culture. Jason Wilson Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address. www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail

2 1

SciTechNet(sm): Science and Technology Social Networking Services
by Gerry Mckiernan 10 Feb '08

10 Feb '08

***APOLOGIES FOR RECEIPT OF DUPLICATE POSTINGS*** Colleagues/ In addition to my _Scholarship 2.0_ blog [ http://scholarship20.blogspot.com/ ], I have a blog titled _SciTechNet(sm): Science and Technology Social Networking Services_. SciTechNet(sm) is devoted to "describing and documenting online social networking services in the Sciences and Technology" and is located at [ http://scitechnet.blogspot.com/ ] Postings include: >PLoS ONE: A Post-Publication-Peer-Reviewed-Open-Access-E-Journal PLoS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online journal." It "features reports of primary research from all disciplines within science and medicine. By not excluding papers on the basis of subject area, PLoS ONE facilitates the discovery of the connections between papers whether within or between disciplines." "Each submission will be assessed by a member of the PLoS ONE Editorial Board before publication. This pre-publication peer review will concentrate on technical rather than subjective concerns and may involve discussion with other members of the Editorial Board and/or the solicitation of formal reports from independent referees. >>If published, papers will be made available for community-based open peer review involving online annotation, discussion, and rating" << "PLoS ONE will publish all papers that are judged to be rigorous and technically sound. Papers published in PLoS ONE will be available for commenting and debate by the readers, making every paper the start of a scientific conversation." "Judgments about the importance of any particular paper are then made after publication" [http://www.plosone.org/static/whypublish.action] [ http://scitechnet.blogspot.com/2007/12/plos-one-post-publication-peer-revie…] >> 2collab >>2collab Formally Launched >>2collab Video (Beta) >chemistry.org/exchange >Nature Network Nominations Of Other SciTech Networks For The SciTechNet(sm) Blog Are Most Welcome! Regards, /Gerry Gerry McKiernan Associate Professor Science and Technology Librarian Iowa State University Library Ames IA 50011 gerrymck(a)iastate.edu There is Nothing More Powerful Than An Idea Whose Time Has Come Victor Hugo [ http://www.blogger.com/profile/09093368136660604490 ] Iowa: Where the Tall Corn Flows and the (North)West Wind Blows ... [ http://www.alternativeenergyblogs.blogspot.com/ ]

1 0