Search results

(1 - 6 of 6)
“I’d have to vote against you”: Issue Campaigning via Twitter
Title
“I’d have to vote against you”: Issue Campaigning via Twitter
Creator
Roback, Andrew, Hemphill, Libby
Date
2012-12-03, 2013
Description
Using tweets posted with #SOPA and #PIPA hashtags and directed at members of Congress, we identify six strategies constituents employ when...
Show moreUsing tweets posted with #SOPA and #PIPA hashtags and directed at members of Congress, we identify six strategies constituents employ when using Twitter to lobby their elected officials. In contrast to earlier research, we found that constituents do use Twitter to try to engage their officials and not just as a “soapbox” to express their opinions.
Show less
Learning the Lingo? Gender, Prestige and Linguistic Adaptation in Review Communities
Title
Learning the Lingo? Gender, Prestige and Linguistic Adaptation in Review Communities
Creator
Hemphill, Libby, Otterbacher, Jahna
Date
2011-11-19, 2012-02
Publisher
ACM Press
Description
Women and men communicate differently in both face-to- face and computer-mediated environments. We study linguistic patterns considered...
Show moreWomen and men communicate differently in both face-to- face and computer-mediated environments. We study linguistic patterns considered gendered in reviews contributed to the Internet Movie Database. IMDb has been described as a male-majority community, in which females contribute fewer reviews and enjoy less prestige than males. Analyzing reviews posted by prolific males and females, we hypothesize that females adjust their communication styles to be in sync with their male counterparts. We find evidence that while certain characteristics of “female language” persevere over time (e.g., frequent use of pronouns) others (e.g., hedging) decrease with time. Surprisingly, we also find that males often increase their use of “female” features. Our results indicate, that even when they resemble men’s reviews linguistically, women’s reviews still enjoy less prestige and smaller audiences.
Show less
Tweet Acts: How Constituents Lobby Congress via Twitter
Title
Tweet Acts: How Constituents Lobby Congress via Twitter
Creator
Hemphill, Libby, Roback, Andrew
Date
2014, 2014
Description
Twitter is increasingly becoming a medium through which constituents can lobby their elected representatives in Congress about issues that...
Show moreTwitter is increasingly becoming a medium through which constituents can lobby their elected representatives in Congress about issues that matter to them. Past research has focused on how citizens communicate with each other or how members of Congress (MOCs) use social media in general; our research examines how citizens communicate with MOCs. We contribute to existing literature through the careful examination of hundreds of citizen-authored tweets and the development of a categorization scheme to describe common strategies of lobbying on Twitter. Our findings show that contrary to past research that assumed citizens used Twitter to merely shout out their opinions on issues, citizens utilize a variety of sophisticated techniques to impact political outcomes.
Show less
Revolutionary Persuasion
Title
Revolutionary Persuasion, Thomas Paine's Influential Rhetoric in Common Sense
Creator
Purdy, Michael
Date
2011-12, 2011-12
Publisher
IIT Humanities Department, Undergraduate Writing Contest
Description
At a pivotal time in early American history, one man was able to influence the hearts and minds of an entire burgeoning nation by way of pen...
Show moreAt a pivotal time in early American history, one man was able to influence the hearts and minds of an entire burgeoning nation by way of pen and parchment. His name was Thomas Paine, and his revolutionary pamphlet was titled "Common Sense." This paper provides an in-depth analysis of Thomas Paine's Common Sense pamphlet in regards to persuasive communication and rhetoric and how it ultimately swayed the American colonists toward separation from the tyrannical motherland.
Show less
“Broader Impacts” or “Responsible Research and Innovation”? A Comparison of Two Criteria for Funding Research in Science and Engineering
Title
“Broader Impacts” or “Responsible Research and Innovation”? A Comparison of Two Criteria for Funding Research in Science and Engineering
Creator
Davis, Michael, Laas, Kelly
Date
2013-10, 2013-10
Publisher
Springer
Description
Our subject is how the experience of Americans with a certain funding criterion, “broader impacts” (and some similar criteria) may help in...
Show moreOur subject is how the experience of Americans with a certain funding criterion, “broader impacts” (and some similar criteria) may help in efforts to turn the European concept of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) into a useful guide to funding Europe’s scientific and technical research. We believe this comparison may also be as enlightening for Americans concerned with revising research policy. We have organized our report around René Von Schomberg’s definition of RRI, since it seems both to cover what the European research group to which we belong is interested in and to be the only widely accepted definition of RRI. According to Von Schomberg, RRI: “… is a transparent, interactive process by which societal actors and innovators become mutually responsive to each other with a view to the (ethical) acceptability, sustainability and societal desirability of the innovation process and its marketable products (in order to allow a proper embedding of scientific and technological advances in our society).” While RRI seeks fundamental changes in the way research is conducted, Broader Impacts is more concerned with more peripheral aspects of research: widening participation of disadvantaged groups, recruiting the next generation of scientists, increasing the speed with which results are used, and so on. Nevertheless, an examination of the broadening of funding criteria over the last four decades suggests that National Science Foundation has been moving in the direction of RRI.
Sponsorship: European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme grant number 321400.
Show less
From positivism to conventionalism: Comte, Renouvier, and Poincaré
Title
From positivism to conventionalism: Comte, Renouvier, and Poincaré
Creator
Schmaus, Warren
Date
2019, 2019
Publisher
Elsevier