Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 338 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 68 - Next  Jump:
2013 - American Sociological Association Annual Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: 10445 words || 
Info
1. Van Leeuwen, Anouk., Klandermans, Bert. and van Stekelenburg, Jacquelien. "A Study of the Perceived Atmosphere of Street Demonstrations: How Demonstrators Evaluate Police-demonstrator Interactions and Why" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Hilton New York and Sheraton New York, New York, NY, Aug 09, 2013 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-04-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p650679_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This study explores whether protest dynamics can be discerned in a more nuanced way than by the current peaceful-violent dichotomy. We assess these dynamics from a demonstrator’s perspective. For our study, we test how demonstrators perceived police-demonstrator interactions at the demonstration they attended. We employ a multilevel dataset of 64 Western European street demonstrations that took place between 2009-2012. Our results show that demonstrators perceive four types of police-demonstrator interactions. To understand this divergence, we study why demonstrators perceived police-demonstrator interactions the way they did. Our results show that demonstrators’ perceptions are shaped by individual – and demonstration characteristics. As these results confirm studies that explain protest dynamics, they validate our typology. This paper is ended by an exploration of the implications of our findings and an introduction of a new concept to distinguish protest dynamics in a more nuanced way: the perceived ‘atmosphere’ of street demonstrations.

2015 - SRCD Biennial Meeting Words: 485 words || 
Info
2. Shamsudheen, Rubeena. and Csibra, Gergely. "The role of ostensive demonstration and object labeling in promoting generalization of non-verbally demonstrated object properties" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the SRCD Biennial Meeting, Pennsylvania Convention Center and the Philadelphia Marriott Downtown Hotel, Philadelphia, PA, Mar 19, 2015 <Not Available>. 2019-04-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p961094_index.html>
Publication Type: Individual Poster
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Learning about object kinds is an efficient strategy to economize cognitive resources. Generic statements that express kind encompassing facts would be one way through which such knowledge can be conveyed and acquired. Despite the obvious importance of generic language in learning and expressing information about kinds, it is unlikely that the concepts emerge only after the linguistic competences to comprehend generic expressions have matured. The theory of natural pedagogy proposes that young infants can interpret non-verbal referential acts that occur in an ostensive context as generic expressions even before they are ready to process verbal generic statements (Csibra & Shamsudheen, in press). In the current study we investigated whether nonverbal but ostensive presentation of information would be interpreted by toddlers as expressing generic information. Although some evidence lends indirect support to this claim (Yoon et al., 2008; Futo et al., 2010, Butler & Markman, 2012, 2014), Chen and & Rhodes (2013) found that 18-month-old infants are more likely to generalize information acquired by non-ostensive than ostensive demonstrations. We attempted to replicate this finding, and also tested whether the generic expectation triggered by ostensive demonstration needs to be supported by additional information, such as labels, that can allow the infant to identify further members of the kind to which the generic knowledge can be extended. Infants were presented with a target action, eliciting a non-obvious dispositional property, performed ostensively or non-ostensively, on a novel toy (demo toy). The infants were then handed the toy, and their attempts to elicit the demonstrated property from the demo toy and two further inert test toys (one identical to the demo toy T1 and one that differed in color T2) were measured.

In Experiment 1, ostensive vs. non-ostensive demonstration alone did not differentially affect 18-month-olds’ explorative behavior. In Experiment 2, when all the three objects (demo, T1, T2) were ostensively labeled with the same name prior to the demonstration, 18-month-olds who received ostensive demonstration persisted significantly more in their attempts to elicit the property from T2 than the ones who had received a non-ostensive demonstration. Interestingly, 18- month-olds who received the label for only the demo toy before the ostensive demonstration did not persist in their attempts on T2, indicating that hearing a label did not promote generalization by itself. Our findings confirm the hypothesis that ostensive contexts can lead 18-month-olds to take an ostensively demonstrated property on a specific object as generic to the kind, but, in order to generalize this property to other objects, they require further information that allow them to identify other objects as kind members. Counterintuitively, mere similarity (i.e., identical shape) does not seem to fulfill this function. Our results thus indicate that the role labels play in learning about kinds is narrower than previously proposed (Gelman, 2004). While labels help in identifying which individuals belong to a kind, generic information can be learned through non-linguistic communicative referential acts – what we term as nonverbal generics.

2010 - 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions Words: 348 words || 
Info
3. Russell, Stewart. "What will CCS demonstrations demonstrate?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 4S Annual Meeting - Abstract and Session Submissions, Komaba I Campus, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan, <Not Available>. 2019-04-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p422128_index.html>
Publication Type: Abstract
Abstract: Great expectations have arisen around planned CCS demonstration projects, and we can anticipate intense scrutiny and public contestation. CCS demonstrations are costly and need to be rapid. All this forms a challenging context for establishing reliable judgements on the properties and future of CSC. Drawing on STS material on demonstrations and testing, and the limited existing empirical work on CCS demonstrations, this paper explores how the specific character and circumstances of CCS innovation – their design, organisation and control – will affect the outcomes. It also considers how these demonstrations may come to be seen – by industry, policy makers, critics and other onlookers – as successful or not.
STS perspectives have much to contribute, particularly through their focus on the structure of socio-technical systems and the processes shaping them, and on the dynamics of knowledge production in and around technologies. They can contribute by clarifying the complex relations between demonstration, other elements of the system of innovation, and the wider context; and by highlighting the often neglected social and political dimensions of demonstration.
This paper builds on the useful analysis by Rosental (and related work by Shapin and Schaffer) of demonstration as an event performed by a demonstrator in interaction with artefacts and audiences. It also draws on STS treatments of testing; following Spinardi and Collins, it considers the tension in demonstration efforts between the need to perform realistic tests of the technology and learn about its performance, and the need to ensure a display of successful results. STS work on systems and configurations, are also important in understanding how realistic are the representations of the system being demonstrated, and the implications of demonstrations not being conducted on the whole system.
The analysis has implications for attempts to develop robust and acceptable procedures for CCS demonstrations, and related policies. The paper proposes an approach to managing CCS introduction based on constructive technology assessment. The unique characteristics of CCS demonstrations – a highly politicised example and the rapid emergence of an already supposedly mature technology – promise in turn new insights for the development of STS treatments of demonstration.

2006 - The Midwest Political Science Association Words: 40 words || 
Info
4. McKeon, Michael. "Demonstrating Respect in Deliberative Politics" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the The Midwest Political Science Association, Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, Illinois, <Not Available>. 2019-04-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p138627_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Gutmann and Thompson argue that justice requires that citizens demonstrate moral respect toward a position (even when they think it morally wrong) on any issue that is not deliberatively certain.  I argue that such a claim is untenable in politics.

2009 - Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference Words: 176 words || 
Info
5. Park, Hyung Lae. "I support Whatever My Candidate Says: Experimental Demonstration That Information Sources Is More Important Than Information Itself for My Voting Choice" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, <Not Available>. 2019-04-19 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p360979_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: I argue that voters do not absorb campaign information as it is intended. They just interpret it to reconfirm their voting choice especially when voters support one candidate overwhelmingly. In other words, voters do not much care the content of information than the source of information. In 2008 presidential election, young African American is overwhelmingly support Obama. Taking JSU students in this experiment are thus perfectly appropriate. After measuring their image toward both candidates and their voting choice, students are asked to identify campaign statements whether it is Obama’s or McCain’s. The manipulation comes next that students read allegedly Obama’s statement which is actually McCain’s statement. Students are asked to evaluate the policy and their voting intention. My expectations are 1) students are not able to distinguish policy differences; 2) they think Obama’s policy is better than McCain’s simply because Obama says. It will tell us that the source of information is much more important and campaign information in fact does not much affect voter’s voting choice especially when they support a candidate strongly and emotionally.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 68 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy