The Case of Chu

Die östliche Zhou- (770–221 v. Chr.) und die Han-Dynastie (206 v. Chr.–220 n. Chr.) waren Perioden sozialer, kultureller und politischer Umwälzungen in China. In dieser Übergangszeit hat sich China von einem durch rivalisierende Staaten beherrschten zu einem unter einem einzigen Herrscher vereinten Land gewandelt. Archäologische Funde aus dem 7. und 6. Jh. v. Chr. legen nahe, dass sich die rivalisierenden Staaten größtenteils der musikalischen Tradition des Zhou-Staats angepasst haben. Die Fülle an Glocken und Klangsteinspielen, die bisher mit Zhou-staatlichen Zeremonien und Ahnenritualen verbunden werden, zeugen von diesem Einfluss. Jedoch implizieren materielle Belege aus dem 5. und 4. Jh. v. Chr. einen weitgreifenden Wandel auf der kulturellen und musikalischen Ebene, vor allem im zunehmend an Macht gewinnenden Chu-Staat. Trotz des politischen Niedergangs der Chu im 3. Jh. v. Chr. hielten sich die musikalischen und kulturellen Einflüsse bis in die Han-Dynastie

Cementing the nation : Burke's reflections on nationalism and national identity

This chapter discusses Burke's reflections on nationalism and national identity

Problematising home education: challenging ‘parental rights’ and 'socialisation'

In the UK, Home Education, or home-schooling, is an issue that has attracted very little public, governmental or academic attention. Yet the number of children home educated is steadily increasing and has been referred to as a 'quiet revolution'. This article neither celebrates nor denigrates home educators, its aim, rather, is to identify and critically examine the two dominant discourses that define the way in which the issue is currently understood. First, the legal discourse of parental rights, which forms the basis of the legal framework, and secondly a psychoanalytical/common-sense 'socialisation' discourse within which school attendance is perceived as necessary for healthy child development. Drawing on historical, doctrinal human rights and psychoanalytical sources and post-structural and feminist perspectives, this article suggests that both discourses function as alternative methods of governance and that the conflicting ‘rights claims’ of parents and children obscure public interests and fundamental questions about the purpose of education

In the MOOD for Citizen Psych-Science

People make funny, frustrating and fatal errors on a daily basis. People can also create and apply strategies to avoid and mitigate error – this is called cognitive resilience. Researchers at UCLIC started the Errordiary project in 2009 as a way of raising awareness of human error research. Errordiary (www.errordiary.org) is an online public repository of the errors people make and the cognitive resilience strategies that they use. People contribute to it by using the #errordiary #rsdiary hashtags through Twitter. Over 130 people have contributed so far. The project has allowed researchers to gain a better insight into the resilience strategies that people use (Furniss et al., 2012). It has also been used as a real-life data set for teaching students about the psychology of human error (Wiseman, 2012). During August 2013 we interviewed 8 Errordiary contributors (5 female, 3 male) to find out more about their motivations for taking part. Most of our participants described their contributions as “occasional”, where Errordiary contributions varied from once a week, once a month, to once every 6 months. As one participant describes, “I go through a period of not contributing for weeks and then remembering it exists.” One reason for this is that contributions are event-driven. People cannot contribute whenever they wish - it has to be once they’ve committed an error or used a resilience strategy. Some participants described forgetting to contribute. Those that were regular twitter users were more likely to remember. As one participant describes, “I was already sharing errors on Twitter, now it’s just adding a hashtag.” The content of the error also had an impact on contributions. Sometimes participants did not tweet an error because they thought others might view their contribution as “mundane” or “not funny.” Contributions are visible to a person’s Twitter network, which means they are visible to a volunteer’s followers that may not know about the project. This makes contributing to Errordiary quite different to most other citizen science projects, where people contribute within the “safety” of being among like-minded others who share their interests. A couple of participants even described how they had set up a separate Twitter account just for the purpose of contributing to Errordiary. This highlights an important issue in using Twitter for data collection, as volunteers make a trade-off between convenience and protecting their privacy. These findings also highlight some of the ways in which a citizen psych-science project differs from a typical citizen science project. In citizen science usually volunteers collect or analyse data related to their environment (Haklay, 2013). However in Errordiary, researchers are asking volunteers to contribute their experiences of error. This means that volunteers are helping to collaborate in research, but at the same time they are the participants of the research. We suggest that this makes contributing to Errordiary more personal, and perhaps more sensitive, compared to other projects. The risks associated with sharing errors (e.g. negative perceptions from others, being viewed as incompetent) may counteract a person’s general good will to help researchers. Overall our study reveals several interesting insights concerning the spectrum of citizen science, and pros and cons in using Twitter for data collection. The Errordiary project is currently changing from being an online archive of error to a hub to engage and learn about error. This includes a ‘Discovery Zone’, allowing volunteers to explore research, media and games related to errors. It is now also possible for volunteers to login and contribute via the website – so the project is no longer restricted to Twitter users only. We plan to explore how these changes impact volunteers’ experiences in future research. References: Furniss, D., Back, J. and Blandford, A. (2012). Cognitive resilience: Can we use Twitter to make strategies more tangible? Proceedings of ECCE 2012, 96-99. Haklay, M. (2013). Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: Overview and typology of participation. In D. Sui et al. (Eds.) Crowdsourcing Geographic Knowledge: VGI in Theory and Practice, pp.105-122. Springer Netherlands. Wiseman, S. (2012). Errordiary: Support for teaching human error. ‘A contextualized curriculum for HCI’ workshop at CHI 2012

Beyond problem identification: valuing methods in a ‘system usability practice’

Historically, usability evaluation methods (UEMs) have been evaluated on their capability for problem identification. However, the relevance of this approach has been questioned for applied usability work. To investigate alternative explanations of what is important for method use a grounded theory of usability practitioners was developed (9 interviews from the website domain and 13 in the safety-critical domain). The analysis proceeded in bottom-up and top-down stages. The bottom-up stages produced insight from the data in an exploratory and inductive manner. This highlighted the importance of contextual factors and the need for system descriptions: UEM adoption and adaptation cannot be fully understood devoid of context. The top-down stages used Distributed Cognition and Resilience Engineering conceptual frameworks as leverage for exploring the data in a deductive manner. These were chosen for their functional descriptions of systems. To illustrate the importance of context we describe three models: 1) where previous research has highlighted the downstream utility of UEMs we expand the metaphor to consider the landscape through which the stream flows, where the landscape represents the project’s context; 2) where information propagation and transformation in a project is influenced by social, information flow, artefact, physical and evolutionary factors; and 3) where the functional couplings between parts of the system of usability practice can be monitored and managed to positively resonate with each other, thereby improving the performance of the system overall. The concept of ‘Positive Resonance’ is introduced to describe how practitioners adapt to the context to maximise their impact under constrained resources. The functional couplings are described in a functional resonance model of HCI practice. This model is validated by interviewees and other practitioners outside of the study. This research shows that problem identification is limited for valuing UEMs. Instead, functional couplings of UEMs should be considered to improve system performance, which influence UEM adoption and adaptation in practice