Memo40+--+Primary+Data+No.3

Thomas Solley STSH 4980-01 Senior Thesis Costelloe-Kuehn 11/5/2014 11/11/2014  11/12/2014

Click here to return to portfolio.

__ Memo 40 -- Primary Data Number __ 3 .. Assorted notes from the "STS" side of stuff -- looking at the "critical technology" prompt, "STHV," and "Annual Review." Hoping to do an in-depth review of a Single, Important Secondary-Source Academic Article for this "side" of my Thesis.

Info on "humanity" can be found in Memo 41.

__Primary Source__

__Notes & Annotations;__ [Looking-through the abstracts to find a useful article] [EBSCOHost results for "critical technology studies"] >> -> fits with my understanding of the UWash article... >> -> "communications, network commons" >> Great stuff so far, found four articles that could be of use...
 * "Dislike" article
 * Claims not much done in "studies combining theoretical and empirical research in te context of social media,"
 * UPDATE; the professor seems to agree that this could be a really good article for me. So this, along with the "Materialized" article could both be excellent.
 * "Agency" article
 * I suppose this could be another lens to look-at in terms of H+ and SM comments -- look at the tech of Smartphones or other in terms of 'agency'... Could be useful to say why I am NOT using this as a lens (seeking not to describe the complaints if possible, but to explore the space "between" them)
 * Not much else I can do with this piece -- while a good lens for analyzing the series of comments used, I THINK I am looking-at them from another perspective already -- what they tell us about definitions of "humanity", in which case "agency" is a similar -- perhaps even parallel -- lens.
 * "Information Technology" article
 * Had been hoping to find something in terms of "social networking helps in industry," but instead the paper talks of links between managerial-oversight-positions and investments into IT-jobs, e.g. the more money spent into IT while "reducing the number of clericals and professionals" experienced positive returns, blah blah blah. Not what I was hoping to find.
 * "What is User Engagement" article
 * Had hoped upon reading the title to find stuff on "user engagement with social networking and smartphones," e.g. to find links between these, but I guess not?
 * Useful def-term though when considering (if I were considering) specific use-cases and complaints of technologies (which I am not, as the KSL and Haaretz articles did not do so, and all as-per the .... ___blog (talk of the anti_FB co?interview?), the complaints given/found are against the tech -- not against underlying principles of humanity. Thus I want to find and focus-on the UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES OF HUMANITY.
 * "Technology as Materialized Action" article
 * I had been expecting this paper to cite examples of specific action manifested -- which it actually might, but I cannot be certain, as I can't currently access the full piece -- however the Abstract seems promising, looking at technology as a "manifested" form of "action" and psychology.
 * This could be interesting. I would like to follow-up with it, maybe, in the hopes of seeing what this may have to say about the Internet, Computers, Social Netoworks, and Smartphones as "manifested actions".
 * "Appropriating civic information" article
 * This could be another great use-case example -- it looks like someone did "my work for me," e.g. they examined the role of computers and the Internet in Swedish homes. I would greatly value to see the results this article found -- especially since it claims "With 71 percent of its households owning computers and having internet access, Sweden is one of the world's leading information and communication technology (ICT) nations." -- e.g. I see this as a great "leading use-case"...
 * "Technological COnstruction of Social Power" article
 * Another great example -- this one looking at the empowerment of technological artifacts in society! I easily see the author referencing social-networking and the Internet, with respect to the Occupy and Ghaza/Egypt rebellions of 2011...
 * I see this as being a great piece, if I wanted to demonstrate the uses that communication-technologies have in modern society...

[Looking through the STHV articles] [STHV results for "slow movement", found 30 items, not all of which are relevant][I'll list only th relevant ones, of which I'm going-through the abstracts to find IF they are relevant or not]. Ehhhhhh so many... Finally made it through all these, but I'll be damned -- it took a long time! Now, I'll just group all the ones I mentioned as "Related," and then move into the AR articles...
 * "A Framework for Analyzing Dialogues over the Acceptability of Controversial Technologies" paper
 * Discussion of "PACT" -- public acceptability of controversial technologies -- in terms of waste disposal tech. Useful in creating a space of "discussing" the Slow Movement negativities, e.g. a new "lens" from which to analyze their arguments.
 * Useful for this, yes. Not sure if I have the time, but this could certainly be useful. Add it to the list.
 * "Anthropology and the Cultural Study of Science" paper
 * Interesting lens of looking at "culture" -- e.g. as a non-homogeneous scale -- is similar to my existing views. As such, not a "breaker," but could be handy in the future when looking for articles to cite in describing my OWN views of society (which I do not see myself doing in this paper, as I do not have the ability -- I should be neutral in this paper).
 * "Bioethics and the Global Moral Economy: The Cultural Politics of Human Embryonic Stem Cell Science" paper
 * I'm not sure what I had hoped to get from this one -- perhaps a SM view of this particular technology, e.g. an explanation of the views of the organization with respect to this tech, but that is not the case. The Abstract instead discusses how the emergence of "bioethics" has risen to support some... "global moral economy" .... Obviously I will need to read this in more detail at some later point in time, but not for this paper. Maybe for my future paper on evolution, cognition, and synthetics.
 * "Civil Politics in the Animal Rights Conflict: God Terms versus Casuistry in Cambridge, Massachussetts" paper
 * I had hoped, as with the "Bioethics" paper, to find some discussion of the SM arguments with respect to this issue, but I can't tell if that is something that this paper includes or not -- instead the paper seems to focus on a specific use-case of animal rights, and how in that case, a major struggle was actually avoided. Interesting in its own right, but not here.
 * "Cogntiive Structures in the Perception of Modern Tehcnologies" paper
 * "It is shown that attitudes of the public about "technology in general" are not stable and can easily be affected by how the subject is introduced. " [Useful quote, good thing to keep in mind in general]
 * Interesting. Sadly out-of-scope, as this paper is from 1990, however if I could find another like this (e.g. more recent, within 2007-2014), this would be a great way of getting the STS community-perspective of the "generalized attitudes" towards certain technologies, including communication technologies that i am interested in! [If I were doing a chart of how the opinions had changed thru time, this would be useful, but my scope is not going back that far]
 * "Computerization and Social Transformations" paper
 * Again, sadly a 1991 paper, but... Despite that, a great piece for looking at the views/changes that "computerization" have made within certain industry and academic circles. Would, again, be a great piece, except that it is out-of-scope.
 * "Controversies in Science and Technology---A Protocol for Comparative Research" paper
 * AHHHHHHHH THIS ONE DOES NOT HAVE AN ABSTRACT!!! NOOOOOOO.... Though the paper is from 1981, I would have hoped to find some discussion from the Slow Movement perspective with regards to the Internet, Computers, and Smartphones...
 * "Cultural Coproduction of Four States of Knowledge" paper
 * ..... Ummm.... Sadly I have not read the original 2004 paper, so I don't know what the "four states" are... But it sounds like an interesting "external" piece, for my own edification only.
 * "Engineering Practice and Engineering Ethics" paper
 * Hoping to find discussion of social backlash against engineering ethics in some form (again, seeking some sort of "organized" response from the Slow Movement here, even from a localized, community perspective -- a rally, **SOMETHING**)... But instead the Abstract discusses the Challenger incident, and the need to distill engineers with a recognition for ethics and pre-emptive safety features. NOT what I was expecting or looking-for. Now, if I knew the perspective of the paper was from a SM-lens, then this could be useful .... But as the SM does not appear to have any spokespersons in the STS community [at least, I've not found such in GS or EBSCO; no persons outwardly and openly affiliated with the SM in STS, just perhaps.... Conservatives, such as Woodhouse and Warwick, though they are not explicitly "slow technology" as much as "fearful of technological momemtum"]....
 * "Ethics, Public Policy, and Global Warming" paper
 * Again, not the SM stuff I wanted to see --- this appears to be a furthering of Al Gore's discussion of global warming. Not really useful to me right now, but could be useful when discussing global warming in the future.
 * "From 'Endless Frontier' to 'Basic Science for Use': Social Contracts between Science and Society" paper
 * I had to read the abtract for this twice to fully understand it.... And even now I'm not sure if I do. I had hoped to find some discussion of the "social contracts" conservatives/ SM folks would claim they hold between Society and Technology, but instead... This seems to focus on a 1990s era of National Science Study and Congress, in terms of how policy may have been influenced by "social contracts" or the lack thereof, e.g. "there were more stakeholders and contracts than expected/understood"... So not quite what I'm seeking (too targeteed, not the right era).
 * "G-COT: The Geographical Construction of Technology" paper
 * This article takes a look back at various lenses/models for classifying and discussing the development of tech with respect to the community... Which might be useful, might not be. I don't know if this one contains the examples I'm looking-for or not -- though since the Abstract example is of a bicycle maker from 1869-1880, I rather doubt that the Internet, Smartphones, or Social Networks will get much of a mention (since the iPhone was only 2 years old by when this paper was published).
 * "Genetic Technologies Meet the Public: The Discourses of Concern" paper
 * Now this is more like it -- looking at focus-group responses (economic, social, and ethical) with respect to genetics. Sadly the paper is with-respect to genetics, and from the 2000 year -- not late enough, and not the tehcnology I wanted to look-at. However, still perhaps useful in charting the SM / conservative views over the years...
 * "II. Technology Assessment in Retrospect" paper
 * AHHHHHH this one also does not have an Abstract. However, the paper is from 1976, which leads me to believe it does NOT have the tech I'm looking-for, and therefore is not useful to me....
 * "Innovation and Competition: Conflicts over Intellectual Property Rights in New Technologies" paper
 * Another one without an Abstract... But again, from 1987. Before 2007.... Ergo still not what I need.
 * "Instrument Research, Tools, and the Knowledge Enterprise 1999-2009: Birth, and Development of Dip-Pen Nanolithography" paper
 * Propably not what I need -- e.g. close to the "Beyond Literacy" paper. Ehhhh.... Reading the Absract, it's not about the three technologies I am interested-in... Rather, this focuses on a single-use-case of a single company, with some STS jargon about "simplexity" and "knowledge enterprise". Meh. Does not look like what I need.
 * "In/Visibilities of Research: Seeing and Knowing in STS" paper
 * Probably just another lens? E.g. a self-reflective lens to keep in mind as an STS researcher... Which is sortof how the Abstract reads -- the paper appears to focus on the foundation of the laboratory in science, how that impacts "invisible" STS work, etc. Eh.. Still not what I need, but would have been a nice eye-opener, perhaps.
 * "On the Analysis of Large Tehcnical Systems" paper
 * *sigh* sadly a 1992 paper, so the tech I wanted to see (smartphones, social networks) probably won't be in here... However, it IS a nice lens to look-at in evaluating Smartphones, the Internet, and *Digital* Social Networks...
 * I don't know if I will have time to review this too, but I'll include it anyways (even if only to say why I am NOT using this perspective -- e.g. I'm not looking to review the tech, but to look at the social PUSHBACK to it...)
 * "On the Emergence of Science and Justice" paper
 * This would have been a great piece if the technology-considered fell within my three, yet sadly, it focuses on genomics. However, I do like the view this takes -- considering why "justice" has become a focus/reason/thread/lens/"hegemony" in recent science and STS.
 * I wonder if this would be good to include, if only for the perspective? Yet I'm not explicitly reviewing the STS community here (ok, I am, but not.... as my Focus), I'm looking at the SM and H+ groups... So I would have liked to have seen a paper like this one, but focused on the groups I have in mind and the technology I have in mind...
 * "Popularizing Biotechnology: The Influence of Issue Definition" paper
 * While this is about "biotechnology" and not the communications tech I had in mind, I think the Abstract makes a good point -- the criteria for defining the spaces and persons is Useful. I will hope ot keep this in mind;
 * "...four methods of issue definition: (1) establishing the "biotechnology industry" as a collective voice, (2) forging alliances with established public and private interests, (3) associating biotechnology with popular issues on the policy agenda, and (4) discrediting opponents and critics of biotechnology. These methods of issue definition reveal the importance not only of defining a specific issue but also of influencing the context in which it is considered."
 * "Science Indicators and Science Priorirites" paper
 * Another non-Abstract paper... However it is from 1982, and thus probably not what I need. Could have been useful from a "backend" perspective, e.g. historically reviewing what "old views" used to be... But since the tech i want to use was not around since then, this probably is not going to mention them as a "priority" (though indeed, with respects to my paper that is the only thing I could hope-for -- that somehow, my Tech would be alluded-to in here, Jules Verne-prediction-style...)...
 * "Science, Technology, and Society: Considerations of Method" paper
 * ... An interesting premise, "This article attributes the many conflicting theories about the nature and direction of contemporary technological society to the revolutionary and paradoxical character of technology itself." -- Rather a similar lens to what I'm seeking to do with my paper [combine many ideas and views into a single paper to reveal what divergences and convergences exist].  A pity this paper is from 1989. I would find this fascinating, though, for another historical perspective.
 * "Secrecy and Openness in Science: Ethical Considerations" paper
 * Another paper without an Abstract... And, unsurprisingly by now, the paper is also from 1982, e.g. from before my Scope. Meh.... This is an interesting idea. I would have liked to read this, it might feed my ideas of openness and OS information.
 * "Suspect Technologies: Scrutinizing the Intersection of Science, Technology, and Policy" paper
 * Eh. A drug-testing ethics article... Not what I need. I read the Abstract, but didnt find any info I thought was relevant. Moving on.
 * "The Emergence of a Competitiveness Research and Development Policy Coalition and the Commercialization of Academic Science and Technology"
 * Interesting review and perspective of the emergence of this.... discussed "competition," but not strictly relevant. Still interesting in its own right, of course, but not useful to my paper.
 * "The Historian and the Progress of Science" paper
 * Sadly another without an Abstract... But I would have liked to have seen this, as another historical review and perspective of the emergence of technology through history...From 1985.
 * "The Public Understanding of Science Effort: A critique" paper
 * Another without an Abstratc for me to review.... from 1981... Sheesh, this is a trend; there have been.... how many now without Abstracts from the 1980s? five? I had hoped to find some critique and discussion of public opinion of the relevant technologies (mine), but nope... Can't tell what this is about.
 * "The Rhetoric and Counter-Rhetoric of a 'Bionic' Technology" paper
 * I'm not entirely sure what this Abstract is saying... Some kind of "counter rhetoric", where the original "rhetoric" to convince users to undergo cochlear implants was pioneered by the developers themselves? So... WHat was the "counter-rhetoric"? Who led it? I can't exactly tell. I had hoped this kind of "pushback" would be useful as a single-historical use-case of "pushback" outside of the Big Three I've already discussed, but I don't know where THIS form of "pushback" comes from.
 * I don't know if I should include this or not... But it might prove useful. Better to be safe and "liberal" with my application of background articles here than miserly.
 * "Was There Really a Popular Science 'Boom'?" paper
 * Another 1987 paper without an Abstract.... Damnit. This could've been a useful historical-trend piece (one of many I've found)... Heh, I can't tell if the title is true or not, as there is no Abstract to base the use-cases or evidence on. I had hoped, I suppose, to see ties between H+ thoughts and Popular science, as-per the Videogame article.
 * "'What Are We Busy Doing?': Engaging the Idiot" paper
 * I'm not entirely sure what this paper's Abstract means... I had hoped this to be a target-paper, advising (or mroe accurately, lampooning) the "idiots" in society, which with-respect-to-technology, I had expeted to be the "Reformed Luddites," "bioconservatives,' "BioLuddites," or "slow tech" persosns.... Yet that isn't the case. From what i can make-out, this is an advisory paper with respect to how to engage listeners and gear one's papers towards audience-types of all groups? Useful wit regards to the "styling" of my thesis, but not the content I am looking-for right now...

[Looking through the Annual Review articles] [Annual review results for "slow movement"][There are 41 articles in this list... I don't think we have time to go-through all of them, so I'll come back to this last] [I wonder if I'll come across any overlap with the stuff from STHV? Maybe?][41 articles, here we go... Tempted to put them into MSW so that Wikispaces doesn't destroy my entries with it's BS formatting...][Except that the formatting between the two isn't compatible. Damnit. Guess I save often, save early..] Ehhhh.... Another very long haul. Most of these are not relevant, but that is ok... I did what I could. For more on the method by which I obtained this data, see the Stream from October 19th (?). I think I'm oging to end this one early, list the assumptions and stuff I've found from this process.
 * "Addiction and the Brain Antireward System" paper
 * In this I had hoped to find a discussion of the "addiction to the Internet" that is mentioned/referenced in the "Is Google making us stupid?" article (I think it was there? Refer back to the October 17th notes... I think I mentioned that these thoughts -- of "addiction" to be specific, here -- were not explicitly mentioned in the papers I had read, but were certainly hiddin within the content [and remain as ideas that I have... Softly heard in the media, though I cannot refer to a true case besides the Prince Ea video as a primary source])... However, the article instead discusses the brain-reactions to addiction from a checmical and drug-perspective.
 * This would be useful if a similar article could be found discussing the "addiction" of persons to technology -- e.g. as a counter-piece, able to refute, possibly, the claim that "technology is a drug" by citing this paper as one discussing what ACTUAL drugs do to the brain. However, right now I don't have a place for this piece.
 * "An Environment Sociology for the Twenty-First Century" paper
 * "We contend that two of the defining features of this field are (a) attention to the inseparability of human and nonhuman natures and (b) attention to the role that power and social inequality play in shaping human/nonhuman interactions. These two characteristics of environmental sociology also reveal strong links between this field and the broader discipline, in light of recent reexaminations of classical sociological writings"
 * Well, well.... So in a response to the SM stuff, this view -- of inequality (jealousy, even?) being responsible for the SM claims.... This is good. Very good. Give me more!
 * "Attention and Performance" paper
 * So I had hoped to find another paper like the "Attention in Asia" article, something that could give me empirical data with regards-to the use of Internet and Social Media.... Hpowever, what I found was more of a paper geared-towards actual "attention studies" cases, and the results of further research into "attention and performance" -- not with respect to a specific technology (at least not as defined by the Abstract). Pity.
 * "Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks" paper
 * I expect this to read as a "social networks" commentary -- something about the nature of social networks themselves, hopefully!
 * Yup, Not all that far off with my prediciton. Much talk of "homophily," and "similarity", so I can expect that as a linking-factor between interpersonal relations -- fits well within the models I myself have made, people gravitate towards something they recognize... does not fit within Dustin Anderson's model from two weeks ago, sadly -- that of "people are attracted towards others' positive behaviors -- those which make people stronger -- or to their negative behaviors, those which encourage negative behavior." Pity. I had seen some reason in that argument, as I myself can agree with it to some respect -- see the association with the individual of last year in E-complex.
 * I wonder -- with regards to the movements and I ideas I have seen; this "homophily" -- is there a name for the convergence of like-minded individuals, the "draw" of common ideas? I think Eglash would use the term "basins of attraction," but I feel there should be something more porfound than that...
 * "Conservation and Subsistence in Small-Scale Societies" paper
 * An interesting perspective on the origin and role of "conservation," with respects-to small communities. Just as with the "Addiction" article, I could see this as being useful, but only if "conservation" were a tenent. I have yet to see "conservation" expressly listed within the Slow Tech ideals (which themselves were few and far-between, as the website and Wiki page did not have a manifesto, constitution, etc.).
 * "Creativity" paper
 * I cannot exactly remember when I did this.... E.g. what I was originally seeking with this piece. A suggestion that "creativity" comes only from "nature"?
 * As I expected, after having reviewed the Abstract my views have not changed -- this is an interesting peice, perhaps, to fuel my ideas on "what is original thinking?", but is itself not useful to my Thesis.
 * "Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments" paper
 * Hmmmm.... will this show me more about "inequality" -- will the ideas from SM and ST come from feelings of inequality -- thus, from jealousy -- thus, from an innate fear?
 * Actually, this "cumulative advantage" may be quite useful in referring and describing the TRANSHUMANIST responses/theories, of a "betterment for all" through technology! Let's add this, I want to know more so I can use this term/lens!
 * "Diary Methods: Capturing Life as it is Lived" paper
 * WHat is the "life to be lived"? Do tell!
 * "These reports capture the particulars of experience in a way that is not possible using traditional designs." Nope I don't know what that means, but it references a similar idea with that of the KSL & Haaretz articles -- that "nature" captures an experience that is "lost" in technology/virtuality/digital...
 * Sadly the Abstract reveals a new "lens" -- e.g. how to use Diaries as a means of data-collection, how to analyze the data obtained therein, what special type of "data" diaries are suited-for, etc. Pity.
 * "Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse" paper
 * Will I find something about the persuasive power of localized organizations? Maybe something to explain the draw of the SM? Perhaps a reason fro why they think their "local" model will work?
 * Meh.... This seems to be talking more about the idea of "discourse" --creating definitions for it, describing how it works... I suppose this could be useful in talking about "why I think the current SM model won't work" (e.g. are they LACKING an appropriate discourse?)...
 * So.... This could be useful, I suppose? Though this is difficult to swallow... It does not help that my searches have not been very robust...
 * "Discourse is the interactive process of conveying ideas. It comes in two forms: the coordinative discourse among policy actors and the communicative discourse between political actors and the public." <range type="comment" id="530719508_1">I've not yet seen evidence of political action though -- and perhaps that is where the SM fails!</range id="530719508_1">
 * "Diversity, Social Capital, and Cohesion" paper
 * What is "social capital"?
 * Whelp, the "value of diversity in organizations and institutions" is pretty much all I took from this Abstract... Meh. So unless I make the argument that "transhumanists are useful becuase of diversity of opinion," I'm not really contributing much by using this argument. Especially since I'm of the opinion that the transhumanist/Extropian perspective has a <range type="comment" id="530722474_1">"self-evident intrinsic value." Meh.</range id="530722474_1">
 * "Documents and Bureaucracy" paper
 * Ummm. Unless this is talking about "the bureaucracy" as being bad from a SM perspective, I don't see this as being useful.
 * .... This.... seems to be a discourse on the effect and use of paper? I didn't really catch all this was talking about....
 * "Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgement, and Social Cognition" paper
 * Please give me something about social cognition within the SM movement...
 * As i should have realized, this is a commentary on the "types of cognition" rather than cognition within a speciifc group... Meh.
 * "EMPIRICALLY SUPPORTED PSYCHOLOGICAL INTERVENTIONS: Controversies and Evidence" paper
 * Be nice to find discussion of the controversy...
 * Nope this is about some type of psychological review, not of the SM stuff. Irrelevant.
 * "'Family Values' and Domestic Economies" paper
 * Is there a link? Is there finally a link? Between the SM KSL/Haaretz stuff and STS?
 * .... Mmmmm... No. Rather this turned-out to be a discussion of "the value of the family," sadly. It is possible that the SM-blogs, or individual perspectives, may draw on the ideas from this paper, but they are not inherently a part of the defined SM/ST groups.
 * "Human Research and Data Collection via the Internet" paper
 * Internet? Yes, tell me more about how the internet is responsible for things... Give me data...
 * Nope this discusses the use of "data collection via the internet" as a lens -- e.g. the uses, and types of data that can be gotten from this. Not a specific focus is mentioned in the Abstract. Sadly. Moving on.
 * "Interpreting the BOLD Signal" paper
 * Nope this is not about a social movement, but about a biological phenomena, and the research and discussions about that with regards to modern technological innovation. Moving on.
 * "Is America Fragmenting?" paper
 * Yes, do tell... Olease tell me, are the SM folks a part of this, are theya cause or a result...
 * <range type="comment" id="530756270_1">Not explicitly mentioned.... but I want to review this in greater detail, to see if the SM/ST movements are mentioned among the activists and politicals in this paper. The Abstract is not tellling me enough about the results, or the groups used.</range id="530756270_1">
 * "Missing Data Analysis: Making It Work in the Real World" paper
 * Where are we missing data? Is it within the communication, H+, SM groups like I have been ifnding? Is this to be a positive support of the spaces I've been finding?
 * ... The actual Abstract for this paper is filled with so many buzzwords that I do not actually know what the topic of this paper is about... Wherein does the attrition lie? Where are you looking? I know that the paper references towards "groups without power," but who specifically? I don't know if this is going to be useful or not to me, the paper is cited as published in 2009, but the content seems to be focused back in 2005 -- which does not fall within my scope.
 * "Network Effects and Social Inequality" paper
 * "Internet"? "Social networks"? Do tell...
 * "Social scientists have established that individuals' choices are influenced by those of their network peers in many social domains. We suggest that the ubiquity of network effects and tendencies toward cumulative advantage are related. Inequality is exacerbated when effects of individual differences are multiplied by social networks: when persons must decide whether to adopt beneficial practices; when network externalities, social learning, or normative pressures influence adoption decisions; and when networks are homophilous with respect to individual characteristics that predict such decisions. " Soooo.... The ideas and trends within the SM group may have had exacerbation because of "incubation," and becuase of a prevalence of common ideas.
 * <range type="comment" id="530757884_1">DAMNIT</range id="530757884_1"> Now I want a demographic for where these ideas come from.... Could it be that these "slow movement" ideas come from rural communities without access to modern communication technologies, or are these a "pushback" against them?
 * The KSL and Haaretz articles reveal that these sentiments arrive from persons seeking to "escape" modern technology -- which implies that the persons come from a background or environment which USES these.
 * Yet the UWash and Seattle Times articles show that these "pushbacks" may be... part of a larger sense of "pushbacks," that these come-from and manifest from an ultimately-connected and informed "environment". Sadly.
 * It would be so convenient if I could just point-to the "rural" folks and call them "luddites"... Yes, the names would be easy, of course classifications are easy, but they tend to lack appropriate scope and outliers...
 * Very interesting... The Ghaza and Egypt riots/rebellions (and Occupy) showed the "power" of social networks and communication tehcnologies, if you will --this could be a negative form? That just as much as these techs may be useful for self-expression, as-per the "conservative" fear, these "ideas" being shared may not be.... "intrinsically valued" in the same way as others view them (e.g. with the capacity to limit or harm human health).... Granted even that <range type="comment" id="530759516_1">description</range id="530759516_1"> is biased and subjective, and does not do the appropriate groups justice. The often-used terms are "extremists" and "terrorists"...
 * "NICHE CONSERVATISM" Integrating Evolution, Ecology, and Conservation Biology" paper
 * Yes.... is bioconservatism a niche? Is SM/ST a niche? Part of me thinks it may be... But the point (or sub-task) has been trying to discover just how MUCH of a niche this may be.
 * Though a 2005 article, I thik this could be useful as a lens -- that perhaps these "traditional modes" being passed-through in terms of behaviors and patterns may be mentioned in greater detail in that paper. Could be useful...
 * "Nonstandard Employment Relations: Part-time, Temporary and Contract Work" paper
 * Is this a use-case or discussion from a SM/ST perspective on certain types of technologies? Maybe?
 * "Our understanding of these nonstandard work arrangements has been hampered by inconsistent definitions, often inadequate measures, and the paucity of comparative research." Interesting.... This has me wondering if such a "lack of definition" (communication), <range type="comment" id="530760346_1">"inadequate measures" (self-advocacy, communication), and "the paucity of comparative research" (negative spaces in the scientific community)</range id="530760346_1"> could be reasons for the existence of the SM/ST movements...
 * Eh. An interesting piece, and I'm glad the abstract makes a point of referencing the "multidisciplined" and "multicultural" perspectives on this... Yet the actual subject-matter may not be useful.. Not coutning the quote, of course.
 * "Phylogenies and Community Ecology" paper
 * I don't know what the hell a "phylogeny" is, but "community ecology" makes some sense. Yes, tell me more about "community ecology"...
 * Nope.... It's about trees.... Not about what I was hoping... Again. Rats. Genes and structures of trees.... Biological data and trends of a specific, non-human form (animal.species). Meh. And yes, I struggled for the appropriate terms to use there that avoided (and failed) the common connotations behind those terms.
 * "Political Repression: Iron Fists, Velvet Gloves, and Diffuse Control" paper
 * Does the SM movement feel "repressed" by government? Difficult to say, when the group does not have a united movement website, or manifesto, or paying members, and is not an internationally recognized organization...
 * Meh. The Abstract highlights a paper which discusses the existence of various forms of repression, the means by which repression is classified, focuses on political repression.... Blaergh. Probably points-to the Ghaza, Egypt, Occupy rebellions... But probably is not what I am looking-for -- unless I wanted to use this lens as a means of classifying the "repression" that SM/ST members may "feel" under modern, "technological regimes"...
 * "Political Sociological Models of the U.S. New Deal" paper
 * ... I don't know what the "New Deal" is.... Or was...
 * While the topic of this paper might indeed be useful, I don't know enough about what the New Deal is or was to be able to situate the historical movements and groups the author is discussing here. Sadly the paper is from 2000 and still not of the appropriate time-period, but... I still would have liked to have seen some of the histprical ramifications that the author is referenceing.
 * "Racial and Ethnic Stratification in Educational Achievement and Attainment" paper
 * Is race an issue? Is that a modifier behind the controversy? Not according to my research, but...
 * Whelp just as I expected, this is just a discourse of the matter of racism and discrimination in the modern (2003) world... Ehhh. I should probably read-less into the subject of the paper -- they are chosen with deliberation. Meh. Not as relevant (if at all) to my paper as I had hoped.
 * "Research on Attention Networks as a Model for the Integration of Psychological Science" paper
 * NOOOOOOO THIS ONE DOES NOT HAVE AN ABSTRACT!!!!!!!!!!!! ARGHHH and the subject is so promising too!! The time is from 2007, so it could have been talking-about the premise and arrival of the iPhone/Smartphone/Internet and Social Netowrks.... Ahhhhh...... Rawr.
 * I'll add this to the list, as this seemed to be a promising one!
 * On second thought, no. "Attention network" -- what is that? Until I know what this is, I can't say if this is relevant... I have been hoping, e.g. my understanding of the Title was that this would be drawing links between attention-spans, social/virtual/digital networks, the Internet... But this is probably about some construct within the Psychological field. Meh...
 * "Rural America in an Urban Society: Changing Spatial and Social Boundaries" paper
 * Sooooo.... will this be about some of the changes between the rural and urban areas, with respect to the SM/ST movement, as-per my comments on the Network Effects article?
 * The content of the Abstract passed me by for the most part, I did not see any buzzwords or references to topics I expect in my paper (e.g. slow movement, transhumanism, blah blah blah...) Moving on.
 * "Sleep, Memory, and Plasticity" paper
 * Does the Internet and communication tech have an impact on these things?
 * Nope this is just a discussion of "sleep." Moving on.
 * "Social Cognitive Neuroscience: A Review of Core Processes" paper
 * Yes, tell me more... What are the core processes? Is there a series of processes I should know-about, that I can apply as a new "lens" in evaluating the SM/ST folks?
 * NOPE IT DOESNT HAVE AN ABSTRACT GODDAMNIT.
 * "Social Implications of the Internet" paper
 * YESSSS TELL ME MOARRRR
 * Pity it's from 2001.... May be out-of-scope...
 * Whelp the Abstract was not of much help -- EXCEPT as a means of technologically-defining the "uses" of the Internet, which IS a useful piece to have...
 * We will add this, it oculd be useful if I tried to refute claims about the Internet...
 * "Social Networks and Health" paper
 * Well well well, not bad.
 * This could be a piece used to refute the Prince Ea video. E.g. that folks's health is "interdependent," and "We conclude that the existence of social networks means that people's health is interdependent and that health and health care can transcend the individual in ways that patients, doctors, policy makers, and researchers should care about." Granted, I can't tell if they mean "digital social network" or "physical social network" (disambiguation)... So. I can't tell. But I want to find out.
 * Probably only in terms of a generic "social network" and not, say, facebook... But I want to be certain. If this IS in terms of digital technology, then this could be very useful as a "counter-argument."
 * "Sociology of Fashion: Order and Change" paper
 * Is the "slow movement" "fashionable"?
 * Probably not... "We define fashion as an unplanned process of recurrent change against a backdrop of order in the public realm. " It has seemed to me that the SM group was a deliberate effort --<range type="comment" id="530769214_1"> though not well organized.</range id="530769214_1">
 * "Taming Prometheus: Talk About Safety and Culture" paper
 * Will there be talks of specific safety concerns, e.g. from the SM or bioconservative view? Please tell me there are... Though this paper is from 2009, and likely VERY restricted. Sadly. [I think many of Bostrum's papers are from 2013? Or at least the most recent of his I have is from then?]
 * I'm .... not entirely sure what this is -- there are talks of culture, but I don't see an <range type="comment" id="530769582_1">explicit reference to SM here</range id="530769582_1">... The brunt of the Abstract talks about three different views on culture, and the academic responses to these -- the individual ones may ave merit, but I don't see much of a focus on the specific types of community I want to see in here, sadly. Meh.<range type="comment" id="530770382_1"> I guess this may not be as useful as I had hoped.</range id="530770382_1">
 * "The Impacts of Wal-Mart; The Rise and Consequences of the World's Dominant Retailer" paper
 * I had thought this would be a "reactioanry" piece with some of the "anti walmart" sentiments I have come to expect in society (outside of college)...
 * "The Sociology of Finance" paper
 * c
 * "The Use of Newspaper Data in the Study of Collective Action" paper
 * c
 * "Toward an Integrative Science of the Person" paper
 * c
 * "Trends in the Health of the Elderly" paper
 * c
 * "Urbanization and the Global Perpsective" paper
 * c
 * "Volunteering" paper
 * c
 * "What Have We Learned About the Causes of Corruption from Ten Years of Cross-national Empirical Research?" paper
 * c
 * c

- The title really does reveal the content -- I didn't find anything explicitly with regards to the Slow Movement or Slow Technology, which by reading through what I've found has shown me that no such article seems to exist -- in Abstract, Titular, or Content form (this last is a bit shady though).

__Articles to acquire in full, for Review;__ "(dis)like Facebook? Dialectical and Critical Perspectives on Social Media" article "Technology as Materialized Action and Its Ambivalences" article "Appropriating civic information and communication technology: a critical study of Swedish ICT policy visions" article "The Technological Construction of Social Power" "A Framework for Analyzing Dialogues over the Acceptability of Controversial Technologies" "On the Analysis of Large Technical Systems" "On the Emergence of Science and Justice" "The Rhetoric and Counter-Rhetoric of a 'Bionic' Technology" "An Environmental Sociology for the Twenty-First Century" "Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments" "Is America Fragmenting?" "Network Effects and Social Inequality" "NICHE CONSERVATISM: Integrating Evolution, Ecology, and Conservation Biology" "Social Implications of the Internet" "Social Networks and Health"