Janet Sternberg’s point that people don’t search carefully and therefore miss key references means we need to think about how to make our research searchable - we need to use the most likely search terms in titles and abstracts of our publications. The first time I was recommended to do this was in 2014, and the publisher said that deliberate use of likely search terms makes a huge difference in how many people actually find books and book chapters. This is a rather different way of thinking about how to title academic work than we are used to, but one we should definitely be aware of. Of course, we should also teach our students to search better, using related terms and seeing what is referenced by other scholars on the topic. Also: we should all deliberately make sure to cite women and people of colour in all our work. For the last few years, I have carefully looked at my references as I write, and if there isn’t a pretty even gender balance, I search harder to find women writing about the topic. I use Google Scholar most, but I also ask other women in related areas if they know of other women I should be aware of. I have ALWAYS found more women when I specifically search, and they are usually doing fabulous stuff that has been really helpful to my own work. And often they do not pop up when you first start to explore an area. Not digging deeper means missing out on really valuable work. Jill Jill Walker Rettberg Professor of Digital Culture Dept of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen Blog - http://jilltxt.net Twitter - http://twitter.com/jilltxt My book "Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves" is out on Palgrave as an open access publication - buy it in print or download it for free! http://jilltxt.net/books
On 26 Feb 2016, at 0:00 , Janet Sternberg wrote:
Limited research skills/efforts are often as much to blame as gender bias in failure to cite relevant work. For example, academics and journalists (including women) writing about online harassment rarely cite my 2001 dissertation and 2012 book, "Misbehavior in Cyber Places: The Regulation of Online Conduct in Virtual Communities on the Internet." Researchers who only search for "trolling" or "troll" will likely miss my work on misbehavior because they don't search broader terms like "online conduct.” Just a few decades ago, researchers were encouraged to look for a variety of synonymous terms in order to uncover relevant related work, but nowadays folks tend to search rather specific terms, and if they don't find exact matches, they seem to assume no other relevant research exists. Of course, gender bias continues to be a problem, but it's not the only reason relevant academic work gets neglected.
Janet Sternberg, PhD http://about.me/JanetPhD
I've also slowly been trying to correct the bad habits I developed during my undergraduate and PhD studies, where most of the sources we were given were white men. One thing I've noticed is that in many fields, the mainstream perspectives are dominated by white men, and while digging deeper helps a bit, it doesn't fully remedy the problem. Consciously trying to think about what different perspectives might look like, and the key words associated with that, sometimes helps: for example, if I'm mostly getting the same demographic turn up in my searches, I'll try adding, "feminist" or "postcolonial" or "decolonize" to my search. That, and similar approaches, helps me turn up not just a different demographic of writers, but also often very different perspectives. On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 09:42 +0000, Jill Walker Rettberg wrote:
Janet Sternberg’s point that people don’t search carefully and therefore miss key references means we need to think about how to make our research searchable - we need to use the most likely search terms in titles and abstracts of our publications.
The first time I was recommended to do this was in 2014, and the publisher said that deliberate use of likely search terms makes a huge difference in how many people actually find books and book chapters. This is a rather different way of thinking about how to title academic work than we are used to, but one we should definitely be aware of. Of course, we should also teach our students to search better, using related terms and seeing what is referenced by other scholars on the topic.
Also: we should all deliberately make sure to cite women and people of colour in all our work. For the last few years, I have carefully looked at my references as I write, and if there isn’t a pretty even gender balance, I search harder to find women writing about the topic. I use Google Scholar most, but I also ask other women in related areas if they know of other women I should be aware of. I have ALWAYS found more women when I specifically search, and they are usually doing fabulous stuff that has been really helpful to my own work. And often they do not pop up when you first start to explore an area. Not digging deeper means missing out on really valuable work.
Jill
Jill Walker Rettberg Professor of Digital Culture Dept of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen
Blog - http://jilltxt.net Twitter - http://twitter.com/jilltxt My book "Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves" is out on Palgrave as an open access publication - buy it in print or download it for free! http://jilltxt.net/books
On 26 Feb 2016, at 0:00 , Janet Sternberg wrote:
Limited research skills/efforts are often as much to blame as gender bias in failure to cite relevant work. For example, academics and journalists (including women) writing about online harassment rarely cite my 2001 dissertation and 2012 book, "Misbehavior in Cyber Places: The Regulation of Online Conduct in Virtual Communities on the Internet." Researchers who only search for "trolling" or "troll" will likely miss my work on misbehavior because they don't search broader terms like "online conduct.” Just a few decades ago, researchers were encouraged to look for a variety of synonymous terms in order to uncover relevant related work, but nowadays folks tend to search rather specific terms, and if they don't find exact matches, they seem to assume no other relevant research exists. Of course, gender bias continues to be a problem, but it's not the only reason relevant academic work gets neglected.
Janet Sternberg, PhD http://about.me/JanetPhD
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@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/
Hello all I sent this off list to Gabriella Coleman in reply to her gender thread e-mail and now see it may add a different view to this thread. I am middle aged but 'fresh enough out of a BA program' but not a teacher. I work supporting government social science researchers or 'policy wonks' I think you call them. Here is that reply. Hello I don't mean to mansplane just that I read on gender in my legal studies BA at Carleton and focused on the Internet and computer crime topics as I learned law. I would just add that in sci and tech sociology there is a gender thread that can be found. There are studies of how boy and girls use technology differently. You can go back to the scholars in the 1970's and see analysis of gender in the high tech workplace too. I note that in doing my undergraduate BA at Carleton University in Ottawa we were told we had to pay attention to gender and promote women in our writing and that any sexist writing was grounds for expulsion. The McGill law student's legal studies citation guide was used to allow us to reference first names as an indicator of gender. -----Original Message----- From: Air-L [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of sky c Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:08 PM To: Jill Walker Rettberg Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Please Cite Women Academics I've also slowly been trying to correct the bad habits I developed during my undergraduate and PhD studies, where most of the sources we were given were white men. One thing I've noticed is that in many fields, the mainstream perspectives are dominated by white men, and while digging deeper helps a bit, it doesn't fully remedy the problem. Consciously trying to think about what different perspectives might look like, and the key words associated with that, sometimes helps: for example, if I'm mostly getting the same demographic turn up in my searches, I'll try adding, "feminist" or "postcolonial" or "decolonize" to my search. That, and similar approaches, helps me turn up not just a different demographic of writers, but also often very different perspectives. On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 09:42 +0000, Jill Walker Rettberg wrote:
Janet Sternberg’s point that people don’t search carefully and therefore miss key references means we need to think about how to make our research searchable - we need to use the most likely search terms in titles and abstracts of our publications.
The first time I was recommended to do this was in 2014, and the publisher said that deliberate use of likely search terms makes a huge difference in how many people actually find books and book chapters. This is a rather different way of thinking about how to title academic work than we are used to, but one we should definitely be aware of. Of course, we should also teach our students to search better, using related terms and seeing what is referenced by other scholars on the topic.
Also: we should all deliberately make sure to cite women and people of colour in all our work. For the last few years, I have carefully looked at my references as I write, and if there isn’t a pretty even gender balance, I search harder to find women writing about the topic. I use Google Scholar most, but I also ask other women in related areas if they know of other women I should be aware of. I have ALWAYS found more women when I specifically search, and they are usually doing fabulous stuff that has been really helpful to my own work. And often they do not pop up when you first start to explore an area. Not digging deeper means missing out on really valuable work.
Jill
Jill Walker Rettberg Professor of Digital Culture Dept of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen
Blog - http://jilltxt.net Twitter - http://twitter.com/jilltxt My book "Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves" is out on Palgrave as an open access publication - buy it in print or download it for free! http://jilltxt.net/books
On 26 Feb 2016, at 0:00 , Janet Sternberg wrote:
Limited research skills/efforts are often as much to blame as gender bias in failure to cite relevant work. For example, academics and journalists (including women) writing about online harassment rarely cite my 2001 dissertation and 2012 book, "Misbehavior in Cyber Places: The Regulation of Online Conduct in Virtual Communities on the Internet." Researchers who only search for "trolling" or "troll" will likely miss my work on misbehavior because they don't search broader terms like "online conduct.” Just a few decades ago, researchers were encouraged to look for a variety of synonymous terms in order to uncover relevant related work, but nowadays folks tend to search rather specific terms, and if they don't find exact matches, they seem to assume no other relevant research exists. Of course, gender bias continues to be a problem, but it's not the only reason relevant academic work gets neglected.
Janet Sternberg, PhD http://about.me/JanetPhD
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@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@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/
My three cents here. Its not enough to "add and stir" women's work or "gender" focused work. It is important to understand that women, international scholars of various caste/class/race/ethnicity backgrounds are doing VERY good work and engaging issues from various contexts and standpoints that are integral to the practice of global knowledge building. If someone has a Phd advisor, course instructor or mentor who does not understand this and merely encourages budding researchers to pick up "gender" from women, POC issues from people of color, "international" topics from international seeming named scholars - and they do not see how embedded we ALL are and how the scholarly debates and discussions (white males included:)) to their research/writing - the person who does NOT cite diverse scholars is the loser. Because - they are not doing what it takes to do the in-depth literature review to begin with. The argument of "i don't cite feminists because I'm not doing gender" or "I don't cite race related work because I'm not focusing on race or don't believe it exists in my context I'm examining" doesn't hold... These scholarly viewpoints and investigations existing - and have been put through very strong peer review processes - just as much as the standard names that are considered to be "academic capital" My view - if you're not looking for and citing women or any one else not straight under your nose - your work suffer. Also remember - a lot of women and people of color do a ton of service - we are on hiring committees, we do a lot of journal and book (peer) reviews - we make ourselves available even when there is no clear monetary or other value attached to the work. :) thanks for listening. r Radhika Gajjala *Co-editor of ADA: Journal of Gender and New Media* *http://adanewmedia.org <http://adanewmedia.org>* *Fulbright Professor/Research Scholar in Digital Culture at University of Bergen, August 1, 2015-July 31, 2016* *__* Professor School of Media and Communication and American Culture Studies Program Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green Ohio http://www.radhikagajjala.org <http://www.cyberdiva.org/> __ Radhika Gajjala Fulbright Professor (2015-2016) Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies <http://www.uib.no/en/lle> Visit Address: HF-bygget, Sydnesplassen 7 5020 Bergen Postal Address: Postboks 7805 5020 Bergen Phone: +47 55 58 97 63 E-mail: Radhika.Gajjala@uib.no ____ On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Peter Timusk <peterotimusk@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all
I sent this off list to Gabriella Coleman in reply to her gender thread e-mail and now see it may add a different view to this thread. I am middle aged but 'fresh enough out of a BA program' but not a teacher. I work supporting government social science researchers or 'policy wonks' I think you call them.
Here is that reply.
Hello
I don't mean to mansplane just that I read on gender in my legal studies BA at Carleton and focused on the Internet and computer crime topics as I learned law. I would just add that in sci and tech sociology there is a gender thread that can be found. There are studies of how boy and girls use technology differently. You can go back to the scholars in the 1970's and see analysis of gender in the high tech workplace too.
I note that in doing my undergraduate BA at Carleton University in Ottawa we were told we had to pay attention to gender and promote women in our writing and that any sexist writing was grounds for expulsion. The McGill law student's legal studies citation guide was used to allow us to reference first names as an indicator of gender.
-----Original Message----- From: Air-L [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of sky c Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:08 PM To: Jill Walker Rettberg Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Please Cite Women Academics
I've also slowly been trying to correct the bad habits I developed during my undergraduate and PhD studies, where most of the sources we were given were white men.
One thing I've noticed is that in many fields, the mainstream perspectives are dominated by white men, and while digging deeper helps a bit, it doesn't fully remedy the problem. Consciously trying to think about what different perspectives might look like, and the key words associated with that, sometimes helps: for example, if I'm mostly getting the same demographic turn up in my searches, I'll try adding, "feminist" or "postcolonial" or "decolonize" to my search. That, and similar approaches, helps me turn up not just a different demographic of writers, but also often very different perspectives.
On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 09:42 +0000, Jill Walker Rettberg wrote:
Janet Sternberg’s point that people don’t search carefully and therefore miss key references means we need to think about how to make our research searchable - we need to use the most likely search terms in titles and abstracts of our publications.
The first time I was recommended to do this was in 2014, and the publisher said that deliberate use of likely search terms makes a huge difference in how many people actually find books and book chapters. This is a rather different way of thinking about how to title academic work than we are used to, but one we should definitely be aware of. Of course, we should also teach our students to search better, using related terms and seeing what is referenced by other scholars on the topic.
Also: we should all deliberately make sure to cite women and people of colour in all our work. For the last few years, I have carefully looked at my references as I write, and if there isn’t a pretty even gender balance, I search harder to find women writing about the topic. I use Google Scholar most, but I also ask other women in related areas if they know of other women I should be aware of. I have ALWAYS found more women when I specifically search, and they are usually doing fabulous stuff that has been really helpful to my own work. And often they do not pop up when you first start to explore an area. Not digging deeper means missing out on really valuable work.
Jill
Jill Walker Rettberg Professor of Digital Culture Dept of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen
Blog - http://jilltxt.net Twitter - http://twitter.com/jilltxt My book "Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves" is out on Palgrave as an open access publication - buy it in print or download it for free! http://jilltxt.net/books
On 26 Feb 2016, at 0:00 , Janet Sternberg wrote:
Limited research skills/efforts are often as much to blame as gender bias in failure to cite relevant work. For example, academics and journalists (including women) writing about online harassment rarely cite my 2001 dissertation and 2012 book, "Misbehavior in Cyber Places: The Regulation of Online Conduct in Virtual Communities on the Internet." Researchers who only search for "trolling" or "troll" will likely miss my work on misbehavior because they don't search broader terms like "online conduct.” Just a few decades ago, researchers were encouraged to look for a variety of synonymous terms in order to uncover relevant related work, but nowadays folks tend to search rather specific terms, and if they don't find exact matches, they seem to assume no other relevant research exists. Of course, gender bias continues to be a problem, but it's not the only reason relevant academic work gets neglected.
Janet Sternberg, PhD http://about.me/JanetPhD
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@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@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@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/
"Also remember - a lot of women and people of color do a ton of service - we are on hiring committees, we do a lot of journal and book (peer) reviews - we make ourselves available even when there is no clear monetary or other value attached to the work." that is - WE review your work.... if our work (and that of many others working on a particular topic from a range of locations relevant to a scholarly piece) is not cited we do notice. r Radhika Gajjala *Co-editor of ADA: Journal of Gender and New Media* *http://adanewmedia.org <http://adanewmedia.org>* *Fulbright Professor/Research Scholar in Digital Culture at University of Bergen, August 1, 2015-July 31, 2016* *__* Professor School of Media and Communication and American Culture Studies Program Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green Ohio http://www.radhikagajjala.org <http://www.cyberdiva.org/> __ Radhika Gajjala Fulbright Professor (2015-2016) Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies <http://www.uib.no/en/lle> Visit Address: HF-bygget, Sydnesplassen 7 5020 Bergen Postal Address: Postboks 7805 5020 Bergen Phone: +47 55 58 97 63 E-mail: Radhika.Gajjala@uib.no ____ On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Radhika G <gradhika2012@gmail.com> wrote:
My three cents here.
Its not enough to "add and stir" women's work or "gender" focused work.
It is important to understand that women, international scholars of various caste/class/race/ethnicity backgrounds are doing VERY good work and engaging issues from various contexts and standpoints that are integral to the practice of global knowledge building.
If someone has a Phd advisor, course instructor or mentor who does not understand this and merely encourages budding researchers to pick up "gender" from women, POC issues from people of color, "international" topics from international seeming named scholars - and they do not see how embedded we ALL are and how the scholarly debates and discussions (white males included:)) to their research/writing - the person who does NOT cite diverse scholars is the loser.
Because - they are not doing what it takes to do the in-depth literature review to begin with.
The argument of "i don't cite feminists because I'm not doing gender" or "I don't cite race related work because I'm not focusing on race or don't believe it exists in my context I'm examining" doesn't hold...
These scholarly viewpoints and investigations existing - and have been put through very strong peer review processes - just as much as the standard names that are considered to be "academic capital"
My view - if you're not looking for and citing women or any one else not straight under your nose - your work suffer.
Also remember - a lot of women and people of color do a ton of service - we are on hiring committees, we do a lot of journal and book (peer) reviews - we make ourselves available even when there is no clear monetary or other value attached to the work.
:)
thanks for listening.
r
Radhika Gajjala *Co-editor of ADA: Journal of Gender and New Media* *http://adanewmedia.org <http://adanewmedia.org>*
*Fulbright Professor/Research Scholar in Digital Culture at University of Bergen, August 1, 2015-July 31, 2016* *__*
Professor School of Media and Communication and American Culture Studies Program Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green Ohio http://www.radhikagajjala.org <http://www.cyberdiva.org/>
__
Radhika Gajjala Fulbright Professor (2015-2016) Department of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies <http://www.uib.no/en/lle> Visit Address: HF-bygget, Sydnesplassen 7 5020 Bergen Postal Address: Postboks 7805 5020 Bergen Phone: +47 55 58 97 63 E-mail: Radhika.Gajjala@uib.no ____
On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Peter Timusk <peterotimusk@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello all
I sent this off list to Gabriella Coleman in reply to her gender thread e-mail and now see it may add a different view to this thread. I am middle aged but 'fresh enough out of a BA program' but not a teacher. I work supporting government social science researchers or 'policy wonks' I think you call them.
Here is that reply.
Hello
I don't mean to mansplane just that I read on gender in my legal studies BA at Carleton and focused on the Internet and computer crime topics as I learned law. I would just add that in sci and tech sociology there is a gender thread that can be found. There are studies of how boy and girls use technology differently. You can go back to the scholars in the 1970's and see analysis of gender in the high tech workplace too.
I note that in doing my undergraduate BA at Carleton University in Ottawa we were told we had to pay attention to gender and promote women in our writing and that any sexist writing was grounds for expulsion. The McGill law student's legal studies citation guide was used to allow us to reference first names as an indicator of gender.
-----Original Message----- From: Air-L [mailto:air-l-bounces@listserv.aoir.org] On Behalf Of sky c Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:08 PM To: Jill Walker Rettberg Cc: air-l@listserv.aoir.org Subject: Re: [Air-L] Please Cite Women Academics
I've also slowly been trying to correct the bad habits I developed during my undergraduate and PhD studies, where most of the sources we were given were white men.
One thing I've noticed is that in many fields, the mainstream perspectives are dominated by white men, and while digging deeper helps a bit, it doesn't fully remedy the problem. Consciously trying to think about what different perspectives might look like, and the key words associated with that, sometimes helps: for example, if I'm mostly getting the same demographic turn up in my searches, I'll try adding, "feminist" or "postcolonial" or "decolonize" to my search. That, and similar approaches, helps me turn up not just a different demographic of writers, but also often very different perspectives.
On Fri, 2016-02-26 at 09:42 +0000, Jill Walker Rettberg wrote:
Janet Sternberg’s point that people don’t search carefully and therefore miss key references means we need to think about how to make our research searchable - we need to use the most likely search terms in titles and abstracts of our publications.
The first time I was recommended to do this was in 2014, and the publisher said that deliberate use of likely search terms makes a huge difference in how many people actually find books and book chapters. This is a rather different way of thinking about how to title academic work than we are used to, but one we should definitely be aware of. Of course, we should also teach our students to search better, using related terms and seeing what is referenced by other scholars on the topic.
Also: we should all deliberately make sure to cite women and people of colour in all our work. For the last few years, I have carefully looked at my references as I write, and if there isn’t a pretty even gender balance, I search harder to find women writing about the topic. I use Google Scholar most, but I also ask other women in related areas if they know of other women I should be aware of. I have ALWAYS found more women when I specifically search, and they are usually doing fabulous stuff that has been really helpful to my own work. And often they do not pop up when you first start to explore an area. Not digging deeper means missing out on really valuable work.
Jill
Jill Walker Rettberg Professor of Digital Culture Dept of Linguistic, Literary and Aesthetic Studies University of Bergen
Blog - http://jilltxt.net Twitter - http://twitter.com/jilltxt My book "Seeing Ourselves Through Technology: How We Use Selfies, Blogs and Wearable Devices to See and Shape Ourselves" is out on Palgrave as an open access publication - buy it in print or download it for free! http://jilltxt.net/books
On 26 Feb 2016, at 0:00 , Janet Sternberg wrote:
Limited research skills/efforts are often as much to blame as gender bias in failure to cite relevant work. For example, academics and journalists (including women) writing about online harassment rarely cite my 2001 dissertation and 2012 book, "Misbehavior in Cyber Places: The Regulation of Online Conduct in Virtual Communities on the Internet." Researchers who only search for "trolling" or "troll" will likely miss my work on misbehavior because they don't search broader terms like "online conduct.” Just a few decades ago, researchers were encouraged to look for a variety of synonymous terms in order to uncover relevant related work, but nowadays folks tend to search rather specific terms, and if they don't find exact matches, they seem to assume no other relevant research exists. Of course, gender bias continues to be a problem, but it's not the only reason relevant academic work gets neglected.
Janet Sternberg, PhD http://about.me/JanetPhD
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@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@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@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/
participants (4)
-
Jill Walker Rettberg -
Peter Timusk -
Radhika G -
sky c