LIS 590 CMC: Computer-Mediated Communication

Fall 2004

N.B. Reading lists for each class are still long. We will reduce this to a manageable number before we reach each week.

Caroline Haythornthwaite (haythorn@uiuc.edu)

Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

Thursday 3-6pm Room 131 LISB

Text: Barry Wellman & Caroline Haythornthwaite (Eds.) (2002). The Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Readings: as listed below (mainly online or available online via UIUC subscriptions).

This is a doctoral level course. Masters students and non-GSLIS students who are interested in the class are welcome, and should contact me for permission to enroll.

Computer-Mediated Communication, New Media and the Internet

This course traces issues and research in computer-mediated communication (CMC) that have accompanied the use and acceptance of media such as email, bulletin boards, listservs, newsgroups, group decision support systems, Internet Relay Chat, MUDs and MOOs, the Internet, and others generally considered under the label of “new media.” While the emphasis in this course is on CMC, it is now extremely difficult to separate CMC from the Internet or from daily life. As a number of scholars have noted, CMC and the Internet have slipped into everyday life (Wellman & Haythornthwaite, 2002), becoming “embedded” (Howard, 2003), indispensable (Hoffman et al, 2004), even ordinary (Herring, 2004) and banal (Graham, 2004). However, it is this very ubiquity, the boringness, which is now a compelling reason for studying them. Leigh Star’s “call to study boring things” (1999, p. 377), although referring to the study of technological infrastructures, is as important for the daily use of such now-boring media as email as it was when the Internet was seen as a “dazzling light” from above (Haythornthwaite & Wellman, 2002; Wellman, 2004).

While CMC and the Internet have yet to become truly boring topics of study, as they become more integrated in our lives, they are rapidly being taken for granted, disappearing as technologies (Bruce & Hogan, 1998). As Silverstone (1999) argues

“… it is because media are central to our everyday lives that we must study them. Study them as social and cultural as well as political and economic dimensions of the modern world. Study them in their ubiquity and complexity. Study them as contributors to our variable capacity to make sense of the world, to make sense of the world, to make and share its meanings. I want to argue that we should study the media, in Isaiah Berlin’s terms, as part of the ‘general texture of experience’, a phrase that touches the grounded nature of life in the world, those aspects of experience which we take for granted and which must survive if we are to live and communicate with each other.” (Silverstone, 1999, p.2).

Despite the impending ordinariness of new media, there is much that is not ordinary or known about its outcomes. Although research is progressing in many new areas, we do not have definitive answers to questions such as: What makes an online community work? What fosters trust in online commerce? What makes someone post to a listserv, contact a stranger, or otherwise engage online rather than face-to-face? We don’t know when it is better to work, socialize, give support online, and when offline. We don’t know what mix of on and offline works best for work, learning, and maintaining interpersonal ties? We don’t know the social consequences of having some classweb online and others not, of letting CMC transactions become fundamental to daily life, or of the larger – global – social transformations that may arise from borderless, placeless communication.

This then is the general direction for this course. We will examine CMC and the Internet as two intertwining phenomena, at some times clearly delineated, at other times meaning much the same thing. We will pay attention to aspects of interpersonal communication (how and why is CMC different from other kinds of communication), group communication (how does group use of CMC become defined, what norms develop and why), online community characteristics, formation and definition, intersections of online and offline (e.g., community networks, home, work, etc.). We will situate this discussion in relation to theories and debates about the workings and impact of CMC and the Internet.

Note: When I gave this course in 1997 and 1998 it was possible to feel confident that a 15 week course would have introduced you to the main issues about CMC. This is no longer the case. There is far too much on CMC for a single course, and to provide just the background to CMC discussion takes more than a full course. Of necessity this course leaves out examination of a lot of relevant material regarding CMC.

We will begin with a mad dash through early work so you get a grounding in the development of major thought in this area, and thus are aware of what had been said about CMC that forms the background for contemporary discussions about CMC and the Internet. We then look more closely at some specific topics.

Bruce, B. C. & Hogan, M. P. (1998). The disappearance of technology: Toward an ecological model of literacy. In D. Reinking, M. C. McKenna, L. D. Labbo, & R. Kieffer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Technological transformations in a post-typographic world. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Graham, S. Beyond the 'dazzling light': from dreams of transcendence to the 'remediation' of urban life - a research manifesto. New Media & Society, 6(1), 16-25.

Haythornthwaite, C. & Wellman, B. (2003). Introduction. In The Internet in Everyday Life (pp. 3-44). Oxford, UK: Blackwells.

Herring, S. (2004). Slouching toward the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication. New Media & Society, 6(1), 26-36.

Silverstone, R. (1999). Why study the media? London: Sage.

Star, S.L. (1999). The ethnography of infrastructure. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 377-391.

Wellman, B. & Haythornthwaite, C. (Eds.) (2002). The Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Wellman B. (2004). The three ages of internet studies: Ten, five and zero years ago. New Media & Society, 6(1), 123-129.

Pre-Course Exploration

A few readings that will get you into the swing of CMC and Internet issues if you want to explore before class begins and otherwise as resources during the term..

Contemporary Trends

Rheingold, H. (2002) Smart mobs: The next social revolution. NY: Perseus Books.

Highly readable, up to date coverage of leading edge uses of CMC and the Internet.

What's Changed About New Media? (2004). Special issue of New Media & Society, 6(1), whole issue. Read the introduction, look at the range of papers and explore what is of interest to you.

Overviews/Textbooks

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: Social interaction and the Internet. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Provides excellent coverage of issues underpinning CMC. See the companion website at http://www.com.washington.edu/cmc.

Assignments

Minor projects (40%)

· Data collection on CMC use (10%)

More details will be discussed in class. Here are some ideas …

· Visit a home site and observe the physical setup of computer(s), and its place in the household; discuss the role of the computer and its use by members of the household (women, men, children; students, working adults, seniors) with respect to work, school (K-12 or university), and mobility.

· Learn about Instant Messaging (computer based) and/or Text Messaging (cell phone based) among undergraduates; discuss what is it used for and with whom; possibly, survey an UG class re IM use or other topic

· Short write-ups on selected topics (10%)

· Readings summaries (10%)

· Participation in class and online during asynchronous weeks (10%)

Major paper (10% + 10% + 40%)

· Abstract (10%) Due: Thursday Oct. 14

· Presentation (10%) Thursday Dec. 2 or Dec. 9

· Draft (a completed draft of the full final paper), required. Due: Thursday Dec. 2

· Final Paper (40%) 5-8,000 word paper (absolute maximum is 8K).
Due: Monday, Dec. 13

Late assignments are subject to a grade penalty proportional to the delay in submission.

Late major paper submission must be discussed with me well before Dec. 13.

Weekly Topics

See the Detailed Weekly Schedule for Information on Weekly Readings

Week	Topic
Week 1 -- Aug. 26	Introduction CMC and the Internet: two intertwined phenomena
Week 2 -- Sept. 2	Interpersonal Background and theories at the interpersonal level · Social presence theory · Media Richness · Hyperpersonal · Social identity (SIDE) · Reduced cues / Cues filtered out
Week 3 -- Sept. 9	Group Background and theories at the group level · Critical Mass · Social construction · Adaptive Structuration · Social networks · Media multiplexity, latent tie networks · Multi-theoretical, multi-level analysis
Week 4 -- Sept. 16	Online culture · Group norms · CMC controversies
Week 5 -- Sept. 23 ** Virtual Week **	Surveys Who is online: current and recent numbers, sources; Digital divide
Week 6 – Sept. 30	Research Methods Online research methods and ethics
Week 7 – Oct. 7	Community Background and theory at the community level
Week 8 -- Oct. 14	Learning and Communities E-learning, Online learning, Online learning communities; Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) Paper Abstracts DUE
Week 9 -- Oct. 21	Society Community networks, community networking initiatives (CNIs), social capital
Week 10 -- Oct. 28	Society Internet controversies
Week 11 -- Nov. 4	Integration in Everyday Life Social worlds, domestication, home, work and school
Week 12 -- Nov. 11	What’s new?
Week 13 -- Nov. 18	Other topics <may need to be a virtual week>
-- Nov. 25	THANKSGIVING
Week 14 -- Dec. 2	Presentations Full Paper Draft DUE
Week 15 -- Dec. 9	Presentations
------------- Dec. 13	Final Papers DUE

LIS 590 CMC

Detailed Weekly Schedule

Week	Topic	Readings: * designates assigned reading for all; other papers will be considered for each week and/or assigned to some but not all of the class to read and report on.
Week 1 -- Aug. 26	Introduction CMC and the Internet: two intertwined phenomena	CMC Haythornthwaite, C., Wellman, B., & Garton, L. (1998). Work and community via computer-mediated communication. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.). Psychology and the Internet (pp.199-226). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. <also in Week 3> Internet Haythornthwaite & Wellman (2003) Introduction. In The Internet in Everyday Life (pp. 3-44). Oxford, UK: Blackwells. <also in Week 5> See also Thurlow, C., Lengel, L. & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer-mediated communication: Social interaction and the Internet. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; companion website at http://www.com.washington.edu/cmc/
Week 2 -- Sept. 2	Interpersonal Background and theories at the interpersonal level · Social presence theory · Media Richness · Hyperpersonal · Social identity (SIDE) · Reduced cues / Cues filtered out	Reviews * Herring, S.C. (2002). Computer-mediated communication on the Internet. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 109-168. * Spears, R., Lea, M., & Postmes, T. (2001). Social psychological theories of computer-mediated communication: Social pain or social gain? In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (eds.) New Handbook of Language and Social Psychology (pp 601-623). Chichester: Wiley. Theories Short, J., Williams, E. & Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons. (selected chapter). * Daft, R.L. & Lengel, R.H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571. * Walther, J.B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43. Spears, R., Postmes, T., Lea, M. & Wolbert, A. (2002). When are net effects gross products? The power of influence and the influence of power in computer-mediated communication, Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 91-108. Culnan, M.J. & Markus, M.L. (1987). Information technologies. In F.M. Jablin, L.L. Putnam, K.H. Roberts & L.W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of Organizational Communication: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (pp. 420-443). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Week 3 -- Sept. 9	Group Background and theories at the group level · Critical Mass · Social construction · Adaptive Structuration · Social networks · Media multiplexity, latent tie networks · Multi-theoretical, multi-level analysis	Review * Haythornthwaite, C., Wellman, B., & Garton, L. (1998). Work and community via computer-mediated communication. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.). Psychology and the Internet (pp.199-226). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. * Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., Gulia, M., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 213-238. Theories/Perspectives Markus, M.L. (1990). Toward a "critical mass" theory of interactive media. In J. Fulk & C.W. Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and Communication Technology (pp. 194-218). Fulk, J. (1993). Social construction of communication technology. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 921-950. * DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M.S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization Science, 5(2), 121-47. Wellman, B. (1997). An electronic group is a social network. In S. Kiesler (Ed.), Cultures of the Internet (pp.179-205). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. * Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, weak and latent ties and the impact of new media. The Information Society, 18(5), 385-401. Monge, P. & Contractor, N. S. (1997). Emergence of Communication Networks. In F.M. Jablin & L.L. Putnam (Eds.) Handbook of Organizational Communication (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. http:/www.tec.spcomm.uiuc.edu/nosh/HOCNets.html
Week 4 -- Sept. 16	Online culture · Group norms · CMC controversies	Online culture * King, Grinter, & Pickering (1997). The rise and fall of Netville. In Culture of the Internet * Nissenbaum (2004). Hackers and the contested ontology of cyberspace. New Media and Society, 6(2), 195-217. Development of online group norms * McLaughlin, M.L., Osborne, K.K. & Smith, C.B. (1995). Standards of conduct on usenet. In S.G. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-Mediated Communication and Community (pp 90-111). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Controversies Dibbell, J. (1996). Taboo, consensus, and the challenge of democracy in an electronic forum. In R.Kling (Ed.), Computerization and Controversy (pp. 553-568). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. [aka “A rape in Cyberspace”] Flaming * O' Sullivan, P.B., & Flanagin, A.J. (2003). Reconceptualizing 'flaming' and other problematic messages. New Media & Society, 5(1), 69-94. Lea, M., O'Shea, T., Fung, P. & Spears, R. (1992). 'Flaming' in computer-mediated communication: Observations, explanations, implications. In M. Lea (Ed.) Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication (pp. 89-112). New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Gender and CMC * Herring, S. (1999). The rhetorical dynamics of gender harassment on-line. The Information Society, 15(3), 151-167. In the Special issue on The Rhetorics of Gender in Computer-Mediated Communication, Laura J. Gurak (ed.).
Week 5 – Sept. 23	Surveys Who is online: current and recent numbers, sources; Digital divide * Virtual Week *	Assignment: Read IEL introductory chapter, Plus, post online the following 3 reports (approx. 300 words each, i.e., a brief summary and commentary) 1. Report on a survey of the Internet, computers in the household, computer use, CMC use, e.g., Pew, NTIA, CCP, NCES, etc. 2 & 3. Review at least two articles: one of the following from the text, AND one paper on the digital divide from the TIS special issue or another relevant paper that you find. Read other’s postings and see how the paper they read relates to yours. Continue the discussion online. Review * Haythornthwaite & Wellman (2003) Introduction. In The Internet in Everyday Life (pp. 3-44). Oxford, UK: Blackwells. Chapters from Internet in Everyday Life Philip Howard, Lee Rainie, & Steve Jones, Days and nights on the Internet. [PEW] See also Howard, P.N. & Jones, S. (2003) (Eds.) Society Online: The Internet in Context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wenhong Chen, Jeffrey Boase & Barry Wellman, The global villagers: Comparing Internet users and uses around the world. [NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC] James Katz & Ronald Rice, Syntopia: Access, civic involvement and social interaction on the net.[SYNTOPIA] <also in Week 9> Ben Anderson & Karina Tracey, Digital Living: The Impact (or Otherwise) of the Internet in Everyday British Life [BRITISH TELECOMM] Gert Wagner, Rainer Pischner & John Haisken-DeNew, The changing digital divide in Germany. Teresa Davidson, R. Sooryamoorthy & Wesley Shrum, Kerala Connections: Will the Internet affect science in developing areas? AND A paper on the digital divide, e.g., from this TIS special issue Digital divide: TIS Special issue Sept-Oct 2003, 19(4).
Week 6 – Sept. 30	Research Methods Online research methods and ethics	* Research Methods – we will assign these around the class so that we discuss all these different approaches Lyman, P. & Wakeford, N. (1999b). Going into the (virtual) field. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 359-376. Green, N. (1999). Disrupting the Field: Virtual Reality Technologies and "Multisited" Ethnographic Methods, American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 409-421. Hampton, K. N., & Wellman, B. (1999). Netville online and offline: Observing and surveying a wired suburb. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), 475-492. Garton, L., Haythornthwaite, C. & Wellman, B. (1997). Studying online social networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(1). http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue1/garton.html (also in Jones, Doing Internet Research.) Neustadtl, A,, Robinson J., & Kestnbaum, M. (2002). Doing social science research online. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet In Everyday Life (pp. 186-211). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Ruhleder, K. (2000). The virtual ethnographer: Fieldwork in distributed electronic environments. Field Methods 12(1), 3-17. http://classweb.lis.uiuc.edu/~ruhleder/publications/e-fieldwork.pdf Herring, S. C. (May 2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. . A. Barab, R. Kling, and J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/cmda.html See also: Jones, S.G. (Ed) (1999). Doing Internet Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Lyman, P. & Wakeford, N. (1999a). Analyzing virtual societies: New directions in methodology. American Behavioral Scientist, 43(3), whole issue. Hine, C. (2000). Virtual Ethnography. London: Sage. Online Research Ethics * Association of Internet Researchers ethics guidelines http://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf * Buchanan, E. (2002). Internet research ethics and institutional review board policy: New challenges, new opportunites.
Week 7 – Oct. 7	Community Background and theory at the community level	Overviews * Kollock, P. & Smith, M.A. (1999). Communities in cyberspace. In Smith, M.A. & Kollock, P. (Eds.), Communities in Cyberspace (pp. 3-25). NY: Routledge. * Jones, S. G. (1995). Understanding community in the information age. In S.G. Jones (Ed.), CyberSociety: Computer-Mediated Communication and Community (pp. 10-35). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jones, S. G. (1998). Information, internet and community: Notes toward an understanding of community in the information age. In S.G. Jones (Ed). CyberSociety 2.0: Revisiting Computer-Mediated Communication and Community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. * Wellman, B. (1979). The community question. American Journal of Sociology, 84, 1201-1231 See also Wellman, B. (1999).The network community: An introduction to networks in the global village. In Wellman, B. (Ed.) Networks in the Global Village (pp. 1-48). Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Details Baym, N. (1998). The emergence of on-line community. In S.G. Jones (Ed). CyberSociety 2.0: Revisiting Computer-Mediated Communication and Community (pp. 138-163). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Etzioni, Amitai, & Etzioni, Oren. (1999). Face-to-face and computer-mediated communities, a comparative analysis. The Information Society, Vol. 15, No. 4: 241-248. * Kollock, P. & Smith, M.A. (1996). Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In S. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication (pp. 109-128). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M.M., Robins, J. & Shoemaker, S. (2000). Community development among distance learners: Temporal and technological dimensions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1). http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol6/issue1/haythornthwaite.html See also Baym, N. K. (2000). Tune in, log on: Soaps, fandom and online community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Kendall, Lori (2002). Hanging out in the virtual pub: Masculinities and relationships online. Univ. of California Press.
Week 8 -- Oct. 14	Learning and Communities E-learning, Online learning, Online learning communities; Computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) Paper Abstracts DUE	* Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigm shifts and instructional technology: An introduction. In T. Koschmann (Ed.) CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm (pp.1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. * Haythornthwaite, C. & Kazmer, M.M. (2004). Introduction: Multiple perspectives and practices in online education. In C. Haythornthwaite & M.M. Kazmer (Eds.). Learning, Culture and Community in Online Education: Research and Practice (pp. x-xxviii). NY: Peter Lang. Selections from: * Barab, S. A., Kling, R. & Gray, J.H. (Eds.) (2004). Designing virtual communities in the service of learning. NY: Cambridge University Press. [also see special issue of The Information Society, 2003, 19] <selection tba> * Renninger, A. & Shumar, W. (Eds.) (2002). Building Virtual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. <selection tba> See also Haythornthwaite, C. (2003). Online communities of learners. In K. Christensen & D. Levinson (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Community (pp. 1033-1039). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. And, for more Local Color :-) … see these essays on LEEP, GSLIS’ distance program in this *brand new* book Haythornthwaite, C. & Kazmer, M.M. (2004). Learning, Culture and Community in Online Education: Research and Practice. NY: Peter Lang.
Week 9 -- Oct. 21	Society Community networks, community networking initiatives (CNIs), social capital	From The Internet In Everyday Life * Kavanaugh, A., & Patterson, S. (2002).The impact of computer networks on social capital and community involvement in Blacksburg. (pp. 325-344). * Quan-Haase, A. & Wellman, B. (2002).Capitalizing on the net: Social contact, civic engagement and sense of community. (pp. 291-324). * Hampton, K., & Wellman, B. (2002).The not so global village of Netville. (pp. 345-371). * Matei, S. & Ball-Rokeach, S. (2002). Belonging in geographic, ethnic and Internet spaces. (pp. 404-427). * Katz, J. & Rice, R.E. (2002). Syntopia: Access, civic involvement and social interaction on the net. (pp. 114-138). See also: Katz, J. E. & Rice, R.E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement and expression. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. TIS special issue Nov-Dec, 2003, 19(5) on ICTs and Community Networking; Schuler, D (1996). New community networks: Wired for change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Gurstein, Michael. (2000). Community informatics: Enabling communities with information and communications technologies. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing. Cohill, A.M. & Kavanaugh, A.L. (2000) Community networks: Lessons from Blacksburg, Virginia (2^nd ed). Boston, MA: Artech House Keeble, L. , & Loader, B.D. (2001). (Eds.) Community informatics: Shaping computer-mediated social relations. New York: Routledge. Locally Papers by Ann Bishop and colleagues re Prairienet, and the Afya project. E.g., Bishop, A. P., Bazzell, I., Mehra, B., & Smith, C. (2001). Afya: Social and digital technologies that reach across the digital divide. First Monday, 6(4). http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_4/bishop/index.html.
Week 10 -- Oct. 28	Society Internet controversies	Internet Paradox * Kraut, R., Patterson, V.L., Kiesler, S., Mukhopadhyay, T. & Scherilis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53 (9), 1017-1031. * Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 49-74. * LaRose, R., Eastin, M.S., & Gregg, J. (2001). Reformulating the Internet paradox: Social cognitive explanations of Internet use and depression. Journal of Online Behavior, 1(2). Available at: http://www.behavior.net/JOB/v1n2/paradox.html * Nie N.H. (2001). Sociability, Interpersonal Relations, and the Internet: Reconciling Conflicting Findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420-435. Time Use (all from The Internet in Everyday Life) Nie, N., D. Sunshine Hillygus & Lutz Erbring, (2002). Internet use, interpersonal relations and sociability: A time diary study. (p.215-243). . Robinson, J., Meyer Kestnbaum, Alan Neustadtl & Anthony Alvarez, (2002).The Internet and other uses of time. (pp. 244-262). Copher, J., Alaina Kanfer & Mary Bea Walker, (2002). Everyday communication patterns of heavy and light email users. (pp. 263-288).
Week 11 -- Nov. 4	Integration in Everyday Life Social worlds, domestication, home, work and school	Reviews * Haythornthwaite, C. & Hagar, C. (forthcoming, 2004). The social world(s) of the web. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. * Howard, P. & Jones, S. (2003). Introduction. Embedded media: who we know, what we know, and society online. In P. Howard & S. Jones (eds.), Society Online. Sage. Domestication * Cummings, J. & Kraut, R. (2002). Domesticating Computers and the Internet, Information Society, 18(3), 221-32. * Silverstone, R. & Haddon, L. (1996) ‘Design and the Domestication of Information and Communication Technologies: Technical Change and Everyday Life. In R. Silverstone & R. Mansell (Eds.), Communication by Design. The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies (pp. pp.44-74). Oxford: Oxford University Press See also Kraut, Internet@Home, Communications of the ACM Turow, J. & Kavanaugh, A.L. (2003). The Wired Homestead: An MIT sourcebook on the Internet and the family. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. See also Home, Work and School Haythornthwaite, C. & Kazmer, M.M. (2002). Bringing the Internet home: Adult distance learners and their Internet, Home and Work worlds. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet in everyday life (pp. 431-463). Oxford, UK: Blackwells. Salaff, J. (2002).Where Home is the Office: The New Form of Flexible Work. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet In Everyday Life (pp. 464-495). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Week 12 -- Nov. 11	What’s new?	Lievrouw, L (2004)(Ed.) What’s new about new media? New Media and Society 6(1), whole issue.
Week 13 -- Nov. 18	Other topics · persistent conversation · language online · mobility · e-science	To be defined according to class interest, including general discussion of ‘next generation’ research questions for CMC and the Internet. Possible topics include Language online Erickson, T. (1999b). Persistent conversation: An introduction. JCMC, 4(4). available at: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue4/ericksonintro.html Erickson & Herring HICSS minitracks on ‘Persistent Conversation’ e.g., http://www.pliant.org/personal/Tom_Erickson/HICSS38pc.html Cherny, Lynn (1999). Conversation and community: Chat in a virtual world. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Genre and CMC Bregman, A. & Haythornthwaite, C. (2003). Radicals of presentation: Visibility, relation, and co-presence in persistent conversation. New Media and Society, 5(1), 117-140. Orlikowski, Wanda & Yates, Joanne (1994). Genre repertoire: The structuring of communicative practices in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 541-574. Kevin Crowston’s papers and HICSS minitrack ‘Genres of Digital Documents’ e.g., http://crowston.syr.edu/hicss-genre-2005.php Mobility Green, N. (2002). On the move: Technology, mobility, and the mediation of social time and space TIS, 18(4), 281-292. Scholarly communities and Science on the Internet, E-Science Walsh, J. & Bayma, T. (1996) Computer networks and scientific work. Social Studies of Science, 26, 661-703. Walsh, J. P., Kucker, Stephanie, Maloney, Nancy G., and Gabbay, Shaul. (2000). Connecting minds: Computer-mediated communication and scientific work. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 52(14), 1295-305. Nissenbaum, H. & Price, M.E. (2004). Academy and the Internet. NY: Peter Lang. … and many more!
Nov. 25	THANKSGIVING
Week 14 – Dec. 2	Presentations	Paper Drafts DUE.
Week 15 – Dec. 9	Presentations