Hi AoIRists, I've been asked by a local TV station to comment on a story they're doing titled "Techno Detox". They have one volunteer (so far) to engage in the following:
We are looking for individuals who are "addicted" to technology (iPod, cell phone, texting, email, facebook/myspace, etc) We would like to have those individuals tell us why they love their gadgets and then have them go cold turkey for a few days. We'll check in to see how they're doing and then wrap up at the end of the week as they are allowed to once again use those coveted items. Now, failure can also be part of the story. We just want people who are willing to give it an honest effort, and candidly tell us about their experience.
1. I know that someone(s) at AoIR in Brisbane mentioned a similar sort of process, but done (if memory serves - always a shaky assumption) as an academic study. If anyone on the list who was also at AoIR in Brisbane can remember this conversation - can you please contact me offlist with the details of the study? 2. I have a number of qualms about participating in the story as a local "expert" - but hope that by doing so I might be able to defuse some of the prevailing dichotomies that seem to shape reporting on media (beginning, in this instance, by using the disease model of addiction as the primary frame). Stated another way, I'm hoping to provide more informed and nuanced commentary that would help both the reporter and the audience move away from these sorts of notions of technology (good or bad? cure or disease? blessing or curse, etc.) - notions that fuel the sorts of "moral panic" reporting on new media (currently, e.g., connections between violent video games and recent episodes of violence in schools, etc.) So ... does anyone have good research relevant to these concerns and the phenomena in question that you would recommend as useful background reading as I prepare for the interview? Many thanks in advance - charles Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php> Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23
Charles: Check out Joe Walther's intelligent academic parody of Internet Addiction by claiming "Communication Addiction Disorder" CAD: http://psychcentral.com/archives/walther_cad.pdf Applicable to so called email, texting etc. "addictions". James Katz conducted an experiment on cell phone deprivation: Katz, J. E. (2005). Mobile phones in educational settings. In K. Nyiri (Ed.), A sense of place: The global and the local in mobile communication (pp. 305-317). Vienna: Passagen Verlag. http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/ci/cmcs/publications/articles/mobile%20phones%2... pp. 97-98 Good luck, Nicola
Hi AoIRists,
I've been asked by a local TV station to comment on a story they're doing titled "Techno Detox". They have one volunteer (so far) to engage in the following:
We are looking for individuals who are "addicted" to technology (iPod, cell phone, texting, email, facebook/myspace, etc) We would like to have those individuals tell us why they love their gadgets and then have them go cold turkey for a few days. We'll check in to see how they're doing and then wrap up at the end of the week as they are allowed to once again use those coveted items. Now, failure can also be part of the story. We just want people who are willing to give it an honest effort, and candidly tell us about their experience.
1. I know that someone(s) at AoIR in Brisbane mentioned a similar sort of process, but done (if memory serves - always a shaky assumption) as an academic study. If anyone on the list who was also at AoIR in Brisbane can remember this conversation - can you please contact me offlist with the details of the study?
2. I have a number of qualms about participating in the story as a local "expert" - but hope that by doing so I might be able to defuse some of the prevailing dichotomies that seem to shape reporting on media (beginning, in this instance, by using the disease model of addiction as the primary frame). Stated another way, I'm hoping to provide more informed and nuanced commentary that would help both the reporter and the audience move away from these sorts of notions of technology (good or bad? cure or disease? blessing or curse, etc.) - notions that fuel the sorts of "moral panic" reporting on new media (currently, e.g., connections between violent video games and recent episodes of violence in schools, etc.)
So ... does anyone have good research relevant to these concerns and the phenomena in question that you would recommend as useful background reading as I prepare for the interview?
Many thanks in advance - charles
Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html
Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php>
Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23
_______________________________________________ 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/
-- Prof. Dr. Nicola Doering Fachgebiet Medienkonzeption / Medienpsychologie Direktorin des Instituts fuer Medien- und Kommunikationswissenschaft Technische Universität Ilmenau Address: Am Eichicht 1, D-98693 Ilmenau Phone: ++49 (0)3677 - 69 4704 (-4703 Sekretariat) E-Mail: nicola.doering@tu-ilmenau.de Web: http://www.tu-ilmenau.de/mkmp http://www.nicola-doering.de/
Dear Charles, You may be interested in an ebook chapter Richard Smith and I published a year ago: Chee, F., & Smith, R. (2005). Is electronic community an addictive substance? An ethnographic offering from the EverQuest community. In S. Schaffer & M. Price (Eds.), Interactive Convergence in Multimedia – Probing the boundaries (Vol. 10): The Inter-Disciplinary Press. Which can be found here on page 137 on the pdf: http://www.inter-disciplinary.net/publishing/idp/eBooks/icindex.htm There is a reasonable discussion talking about perceptions of addiction, community (rather than technology) as the compelling element, and some ethnographic study acting as a counterbalance to the apparent moral panic surrounding the destructive 'addictive' nature of online games. Hope this helps. Cheers, Florence -- Florence Chee PhD Candidate School of Communication, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada Bloggings and bio @ Constructing Amusement: http://florencechee.blogspot.com On 10/2/06, Charles Ess <cmess@drury.edu> wrote:
Hi AoIRists,
I've been asked by a local TV station to comment on a story they're doing titled "Techno Detox". They have one volunteer (so far) to engage in the following:
We are looking for individuals who are "addicted" to technology (iPod, cell phone, texting, email, facebook/myspace, etc) We would like to have those individuals tell us why they love their gadgets and then have them go cold turkey for a few days. We'll check in to see how they're doing and then wrap up at the end of the week as they are allowed to once again use those coveted items. Now, failure can also be part of the story. We just want people who are willing to give it an honest effort, and candidly tell us about their experience.
1. I know that someone(s) at AoIR in Brisbane mentioned a similar sort of process, but done (if memory serves - always a shaky assumption) as an academic study. If anyone on the list who was also at AoIR in Brisbane can remember this conversation - can you please contact me offlist with the details of the study?
2. I have a number of qualms about participating in the story as a local "expert" - but hope that by doing so I might be able to defuse some of the prevailing dichotomies that seem to shape reporting on media (beginning, in this instance, by using the disease model of addiction as the primary frame). Stated another way, I'm hoping to provide more informed and nuanced commentary that would help both the reporter and the audience move away from these sorts of notions of technology (good or bad? cure or disease? blessing or curse, etc.) - notions that fuel the sorts of "moral panic" reporting on new media (currently, e.g., connections between violent video games and recent episodes of violence in schools, etc.)
So ... does anyone have good research relevant to these concerns and the phenomena in question that you would recommend as useful background reading as I prepare for the interview?
Many thanks in advance - charles
Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html
Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php>
Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23
_______________________________________________ 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/
Charles, No research, but an anecdote. I was talking last week with my grad class--mostly media professionals--about their mobile devices and the recent claims of addiction in the media. Every one professed that they were not so much addicted as that the social and career penalties of being unreachable were extremely high. One said that his wife was in Intensive Care, and he was forced to turn off his telephone, and as worried as he was about her, he felt relieved to have an acceptable excuse for having the phone off. (We sometimes have someone leave the seminar, summoned by mobile calls to urgent business.) We decided that we would start a small business: a fake ICU (an Impromptu Communication Unconnection). You would turn in your phone to a receptionist who would tell whoever called that you were in the ICU and unreachable, and that your Great Aunt Sally had fallen off the roof, or something more plausible. To a person, the class said that they would subscribe to such a service. No one wanted to give up their phones or crackberries completely, and all said that there were times they were really helpful, but it was not because of unbridled technolust, but social pressure. Of course, that's just what an addict would say. Blasted totalizing explanations. Alex On 10/2/06, Charles Ess <cmess@drury.edu> wrote:
Hi AoIRists,
I've been asked by a local TV station to comment on a story they're doing titled "Techno Detox". They have one volunteer (so far) to engage in the following:
We are looking for individuals who are "addicted" to technology (iPod, cell phone, texting, email, facebook/myspace, etc) We would like to have those individuals tell us why they love their gadgets and then have them go cold turkey for a few days. We'll check in to see how they're doing and then wrap up at the end of the week as they are allowed to once again use those coveted items. Now, failure can also be part of the story. We just want people who are willing to give it an honest effort, and candidly tell us about their experience.
1. I know that someone(s) at AoIR in Brisbane mentioned a similar sort of process, but done (if memory serves - always a shaky assumption) as an academic study. If anyone on the list who was also at AoIR in Brisbane can remember this conversation - can you please contact me offlist with the details of the study?
2. I have a number of qualms about participating in the story as a local "expert" - but hope that by doing so I might be able to defuse some of the prevailing dichotomies that seem to shape reporting on media (beginning, in this instance, by using the disease model of addiction as the primary frame). Stated another way, I'm hoping to provide more informed and nuanced commentary that would help both the reporter and the audience move away from these sorts of notions of technology (good or bad? cure or disease? blessing or curse, etc.) - notions that fuel the sorts of "moral panic" reporting on new media (currently, e.g., connections between violent video games and recent episodes of violence in schools, etc.)
So ... does anyone have good research relevant to these concerns and the phenomena in question that you would recommend as useful background reading as I prepare for the interview?
Many thanks in advance - charles
Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html
Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php>
Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23
_______________________________________________ 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/
-- -- // // This email is // [ ] assumed public and may be blogged / forwarded. // [X] assumed to be private, please ask before redistributing. // // Alexander C. Halavais // Social Architect // http://alex.halavais.net //
Hello Charles We have far more to fear from the huge number of people who find the new technology of little or no interest. I can't offer any extensive research, but quite a lot of thoughtful experience that I've tried to document. Here is a recent comment on the people using Ryze. . It's on the Truth Seekers Network, but you can read it. http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=738706&confid=1031 <http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=738706&confid=1031> In fact on a place like Ryze is would be possible to document the personal growth and development of members who post regularly. All their letters are retained and are publicly accessible. However I usually write about the huge failure rate on Ryze and with technology in general. How people FAIL to make good use of the Internet. http://www.ryze.com/posttopic.php?topicid=744879&confid=586 I work as a market researcher. My sad discovery in New Zealand is that more than 10% of the population seems to be functionally illiterate. They can perhaps read, but they never do and their skills such as they may have been are poor. (My personal sample is small, only 50 houses) Results of a big study (6000 houses) will be available next year. What's more although 75% of people have Internet access in their homes, most people have no idea what to use it for. They don't join lists, they don't join social forms. They swap jokes, and video clips. They search on Google twice a month. They look at Ebay or Trade Me. That's it. The much heralded "information super-highway" might just as well be a dirt track for all the difference it is making. I met a guy with 7 years "experience" on the internet who was confident that he knew all about it. No lists, no social networks, only 32 people in his address book, 10 to 15 emails a week. Google - "I seldom use it". There is a secret to using the Internet well. It to find other people who know more about it than you, and hang about with them. HOW? Join a list. That's why I'm on this one. Join a Social Network. That's why I visit Ryze every day. You'll also find me on LinkedIn and OpenBC, and a few other places. Every time you sit on a new crossroad, you get to see new things and to meet new people. This is the raw material for motivation and learning. Other people arouse your curiosity, they challenge your viewpoint, they raise to importance issues you've never considered before. There is a knowledge mine there if you care to do a little work. So the TV programme wants to show that not using the new technology is OK. Be a couch potato and watch TV until you go to sleep. TV stations need to be careful. When people understand how to use the Internet TV watching goes way way down. In my case it hardly exists. For young people playing computer games may be a satisfactory alternative to Social Networks. Lisa Galarneau is an expert here. You can hear her of Rodio NZ by podcast: http://202.7.7.90:7000/sat/sat-20060923-1130-Lisa_Galarneau-048.mp3 Or search for her on Google. Lots of pages. There is a distinct need to develop Internet Literacy. I have a play with that idea here. http://www.ate.co.nz/internet/informationliteracy.html I hope that's useful to somebody. Regards John Charles Ess wrote:
Hi AoIRists,
I've been asked by a local TV station to comment on a story they're doing titled "Techno Detox". They have one volunteer (so far) to engage in the following:
Hi Charles: 2 things of possible interest: 1) Fairly recently, I wrote a chapter on the COMMUNICATION IS THE SPREADING OF A DISEASE metaphor. It's chapter 14 of J. Duchan and D. Kovarsky's _Diagnosis as Cultural Practice_ ( 2006, Mouton de Gruyter)--titled "The diagnosis of the constituents of communication in everyday discourse: Some functions, enabling conditions, consequences, and remedies." Be forewarned, the publisher's type-setter started a new paragraph after each block quote, regardless of whether that was proper or not, and did this despite the fact that I pointed this out in the proofs. I think it was done in all of the other articles, too. Ugh! 2) I've had students do the Un-TV experiment described in B. McGrane's _The un-tv and the 10 mph car : experiments in personal freedom and everyday life_ (1994, Fort Bragg, Calif.: The Small Press). For 30 minutes (I shortened this), students are supposed to "watch" a TV that is turned off. Kinda like this cold turkey experiment. Most students report feeling like they've been abandoned by a friend, but there are other reactions, too, which McGrane describes. Judging from Bereleson's article "What 'Missing the Newspaper' Means" (in _Communication Research_, eds. P.F. Lazarfeld and F.N. Stanton. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1948-1949, pp. 111-128) people experience similar reactions when they are deprived of their newspaper. (Here's a replication of Berelson's paper: Penn Kimball, "People Without Papers," Public Opinion Quarterly, Fall 1959, pp. 389-398.) From googling Berelson's paper, I see that Clyde Bentley at Missouri seems to have extended Berelson's insights into the internet domain in one if not both of the following two papers: “No Newspaper is No Fun: Failed delivery, Berelson revisited and what missing the newspaper means.” Newspaper Research Journal 22:4, Feb. 2002. “The E-Mail is Down: Using a 1940s method to analyze a 21st century problem.” With Brooke Fisher. Presented to the Communications Technology and Policy Division at the AEJMC Annual Conference, Miami, Aug.7, 2002. Best, Christian Nelson On Oct 2, 2006, at 11:42 PM, Charles Ess wrote:
Hi AoIRists,
I've been asked by a local TV station to comment on a story they're doing titled "Techno Detox". They have one volunteer (so far) to engage in the following:
We are looking for individuals who are "addicted" to technology (iPod, cell phone, texting, email, facebook/myspace, etc) We would like to have those individuals tell us why they love their gadgets and then have them go cold turkey for a few days. We'll check in to see how they're doing and then wrap up at the end of the week as they are allowed to once again use those coveted items. Now, failure can also be part of the story. We just want people who are willing to give it an honest effort, and candidly tell us about their experience.
1. I know that someone(s) at AoIR in Brisbane mentioned a similar sort of process, but done (if memory serves - always a shaky assumption) as an academic study. If anyone on the list who was also at AoIR in Brisbane can remember this conversation - can you please contact me offlist with the details of the study?
2. I have a number of qualms about participating in the story as a local "expert" - but hope that by doing so I might be able to defuse some of the prevailing dichotomies that seem to shape reporting on media (beginning, in this instance, by using the disease model of addiction as the primary frame). Stated another way, I'm hoping to provide more informed and nuanced commentary that would help both the reporter and the audience move away from these sorts of notions of technology (good or bad? cure or disease? blessing or curse, etc.) - notions that fuel the sorts of "moral panic" reporting on new media (currently, e.g., connections between violent video games and recent episodes of violence in schools, etc.)
So ... does anyone have good research relevant to these concerns and the phenomena in question that you would recommend as useful background reading as I prepare for the interview?
Many thanks in advance - charles
Distinguished Research Professor, Interdisciplinary Studies <http://www.drury.edu/gp21> Drury University 900 N. Benton Ave. Voice: 417-873-7230 Springfield, MO 65802 USA FAX: 417-873-7435 Home page: http://www.drury.edu/ess/ess.html
Information Ethics Fellow, 2006-07, Center for Information Policy Research, School of Information Studies, UW-Milwaukee Co-chair, CATaC conferences <www.catacconference.org> Vice-President, Association of Internet Researchers <www.aoir.org> Professor II, Globalization and Applied Ethics Programmes <http://www.anvendtetikk.ntnu.no/pres/bridgingcultures.php>
Exemplary persons seek harmony, not sameness. -- Analects 13.23
_______________________________________________ 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/
2. I have a number of qualms about participating in the story as a local "expert" - but hope that by doing so I might be able to defuse some of the prevailing dichotomies that seem to shape reporting on media (beginning, in this instance, by using the disease model of addiction as the primary frame). Stated another way, I'm hoping to provide more informed and nuanced commentary that would help both the reporter and the audience move away from these sorts of notions of technology (good or bad? cure or disease? blessing or curse, etc.) - notions that fuel the sorts of "moral panic" reporting on new media (currently, e.g., connections between violent video games and recent episodes of violence in schools, etc.)
Charles, it seems to me that the tendency to use disease models for an excess of communicative action -- for discussion of "crackberries", et cetera -- is not really without its offline precedent. I'm thinking very specifically of people who "talk too much"; there's a kind of taboo-like property (that I don't have a better name for -- stigmatization is not quite it...) assigned to such folks that is intuitively parallel to "addiction". I'm sure that other folks on the list will come up with more exemplars. --elijah
Well done, Christian! Hope to see you at an AoIR conference soon. It did occur to me (despite "talking too much") that the disease model functions more sufficiently when the device is perceived as human or human-like. Reeves, B. and C. Nass (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge, MA, CLSI Publications, Cambridge University Press. I feel sure that Nass/Reeves has said something about this more recently. There was some research on telephone addiction but now I can't find it. Here's one on television: Sundar, L. and S. Sundar (2002). "Television addiction - is no mere metaphor." Scientific American February. refers to paper: Lang, A. (2000). "The limited capacity model of mediated message processing." Journal of Communication 50(1): 46-70. Cheers, Denise Denise N. Rall, PhD thesis submitted, School of Environ. Science, Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480 AUSTRALIA Tuesdays: Room T2.17, +61 (0)2 6620 3577 or Mobile 0427 245 497 http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/rsm/staff/pages/drall/ Virtual member, Cybermetrics Group, University of Wolverhampton, UK http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk/index.html __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Hi Denise: I know what you're saying. But one of the interesting thing about Reeves and Nass's research, for me anyway, is that they show we will quite robustly personify even "dumb monitors"--things that are seemingly very un-human. Cheers, Christian On Oct 3, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Denise N. Rall wrote:
Well done, Christian!
Hope to see you at an AoIR conference soon.
It did occur to me (despite "talking too much") that the disease model functions more sufficiently when the device is perceived as human or human-like.
Reeves, B. and C. Nass (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge, MA, CLSI Publications, Cambridge University Press.
I feel sure that Nass/Reeves has said something about this more recently.
There was some research on telephone addiction but now I can't find it. Here's one on television: Sundar, L. and S. Sundar (2002). "Television addiction - is no mere metaphor." Scientific American February.
refers to paper: Lang, A. (2000). "The limited capacity model of mediated message processing." Journal of Communication 50(1): 46-70.
Cheers, Denise
Denise N. Rall, PhD thesis submitted, School of Environ. Science, Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480 AUSTRALIA Tuesdays: Room T2.17, +61 (0)2 6620 3577 or Mobile 0427 245 497 http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/rsm/staff/pages/drall/ Virtual member, Cybermetrics Group, University of Wolverhampton, UK http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk/index.html
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ 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/
Whoops. Dang it. I thought that was going to Denise alone. Sorry folks, Christian On Oct 3, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Christian Nelson wrote:
Hi Denise: I know what you're saying. But one of the interesting thing about Reeves and Nass's research, for me anyway, is that they show we will quite robustly personify even "dumb monitors"--things that are seemingly very un-human. Cheers, Christian
On Oct 3, 2006, at 5:28 PM, Denise N. Rall wrote:
Well done, Christian!
Hope to see you at an AoIR conference soon.
It did occur to me (despite "talking too much") that the disease model functions more sufficiently when the device is perceived as human or human-like.
Reeves, B. and C. Nass (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge, MA, CLSI Publications, Cambridge University Press.
I feel sure that Nass/Reeves has said something about this more recently.
There was some research on telephone addiction but now I can't find it. Here's one on television: Sundar, L. and S. Sundar (2002). "Television addiction - is no mere metaphor." Scientific American February.
refers to paper: Lang, A. (2000). "The limited capacity model of mediated message processing." Journal of Communication 50(1): 46-70.
Cheers, Denise
Denise N. Rall, PhD thesis submitted, School of Environ. Science, Southern Cross University, Lismore NSW 2480 AUSTRALIA Tuesdays: Room T2.17, +61 (0)2 6620 3577 or Mobile 0427 245 497 http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/rsm/staff/pages/drall/ Virtual member, Cybermetrics Group, University of Wolverhampton, UK http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk/index.html
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ 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 (8)
-
Alex Halavais -
Charles Ess -
Christian Nelson -
Denise N. Rall -
elw＠stderr.org -
Florence Chee -
John Veitch -
Nicola Doering