Advertisement

Internet Communication Research Overview

  • Iyad Muhsen AlDajani
Chapter
  • 8 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Social Networks book series (LNSN)

Abstract

This study is an interdisciplinary research that applies Phronesis in Social Sciences illustrated in Internet research methodologies in an experimental intervention research design to investigate the impact of the usage of internet communication technologies on the reconciliation process, applied in a case study in the Palestinian –Israeli context.

Bibliography

Books

  1. Barakat, Z. (2017). From heart of stone to heart of flesh: Evolutionary journey from extremism to moderation. München: Herbert Utz Verlag GmbH.Google Scholar
  2. Bar-Siman-Tov, Y. (Ed.). (2004). From conflict resolution to reconciliation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bekerman, Z., & Horenzsyk, G. (2009). Computer supported collaborative Intercultural Education. In C. Vrasidas, M. Zembylas, & G. Glass (Eds.), ICT for education, development and social justice (pp. 201–213) Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  4. Bazeley, P., & Jackson, K. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVivo (2nd ed.). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  5. Bernhard, B. (1952). Content analysis in communicative research. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  6. Boellstrorff, T., Nardi, B., Pearce, C., & Taylor, T. (2012). Ethnography and the virtual world: A handbook of methods. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cammaert, B., & Carpentier, N. (2007). Reclaiming the media: Communication rights and democratic media roles. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. Couldry, N. (2012). Media, society, world social theory and digital media practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design qualitative quantitative mixed-methods approach (4th ed.). California: SAGE.Google Scholar
  10. Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed-method research (2nd ed.). California: SAGE.Google Scholar
  11. Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2018). Designing and Conducting Mixed-Methods Research. London: SAGE. Available at Amazon [Kindle Edition].Google Scholar
  12. Cronin, C. (2008). Between naturalism and religion by Jürgen Habermas. Cambridge: Polity. [German, 2005b].Google Scholar
  13. Elster, J. (1998). Deliberative democracy (Cambridge studies in the theory of democracy). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fishkin, J. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Kindle Edition] Available at Amazon.Google Scholar
  15. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter. Cambridge: Cambridge Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Flyvbjerg, B. (2013). Mega projects and risks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Flyvbjerg, B., Landman, T., & Schram, S. (Eds.). (2012). Applied Phronesis in Real Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Kindle Edition] Available at Amazon.Google Scholar
  18. Gastil, J., & Levine, P. (2005a). The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the twenty-first century. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  19. Gould, M. (2013). Social media gospel. Minnesota: Liturgical Press.Google Scholar
  20. Green, J. C. (2007). Mixed-methods in social inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  21. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Kindle Edition] Available at Amazon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2009). Why deliberative democracy? Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Kozinets, R. (2015). Netnography redefined (2nd ed.). California: SAGE.Google Scholar
  24. Krippendorff, K. (2013). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (3rd ed.). Pennsylvania: SAGE.Google Scholar
  25. Leiner, M., & Flämig, S. (Hg.). (2012). Latin America between conflict and reconciliation. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  26. Leiner, M., & Schließer, C. (Eds.). (2018). Alternative approaches in conflict resolution. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  27. Lenhardt, C., & Nicholsen, W. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Original in German, published in 1983].Google Scholar
  28. Luskin, R. C. (2003). The heavenly public: What would the ideal democratic citizenry be like? In M. B. MacKuen & G. Rabinowitz (Eds.), Electoral Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lysack, C. L., Krefting, L., & Gliner, J. A. (1994). Qualitative methods in field research: An Indonesian experience in community based practice. The Occupational Therapy Journal of Research, 14(2), 93–111.  https://doi.org/10.1177/153944929401400203.
  30. Mcleod, S., & Lehmann, C. (2012). What school leaders need to know about digital technologies and social media. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  31. Miall, H. (2003). Conflict transformation: A multi-dimensional task. Berghof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management – Edited version, August 2004 (First launch March 2001).Google Scholar
  32. Newman, M. (2010). Networks: An introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pool, I. (1983). Technologies of Freedom. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  34. Ritzer, G. (2008). Classical sociological theory (5th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill Higher Education.Google Scholar
  35. Saldana, J. (2013a). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). London: SAGE. [Kindle Edition] Available at Amazon.Google Scholar
  36. Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis in practice. Los Angeles: SAGE. [Kindle Edition] Available at Amazon.Google Scholar
  37. Selian, B. A. (2002). ICTs in support of human rights, democracy, and good governance. Geneva: International Union Telecommunication.Google Scholar
  38. Vrasidas, C., Zembylas, M., & Glass, G. (2009). ICT for education development and social justice. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar

Articles in Journals & Chapters in Books

  1. Basset, E. H., & O'Riordan, K. (2002). Contesting the human subject research model, ethics and information technologies. Ethics of Internet Research, 4, 233–247.Google Scholar
  2. Boneva, B., Kraut, R., & Frohlich, D. (2001). Using email for personal relationships. American Behavioral Sciences., 43(3), 530–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Botes, J. (2001, Autumn/Winter). Conflict transformation: A debate over semantics Botes. The International Journal of Peace Studies, 6(2), 1–4.Google Scholar
  4. Brantmeier, E. (2009). ICT for peace and reconciliation. In C. Vrasidas, M. Zembylas, & G. Glass (Eds.), ICT for education, development and social justice (pp. 213–236). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  5. Cohen, J. (1998). Democracy and liberty. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (Cambridge studies in the theory of democracy) (pp. 185–231). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139175005.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cole, R., & Crawford, T. (2007). Building peace through information and communications technologies. Accessed 24 Jan 2016. Available at http://apo.org.au/node/16132
  7. Cuban, L. (2003). Review of oversold and underused computers in the classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 42–45.Google Scholar
  8. Dajani, M. (2009, December). The Arab peace initiative: Lost in the translation. Crosscurrent, 59(4), 532–539.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dangwal, K. L., & Srivastava, S. (2015). Fostering peace education through ICT. International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews., 2(2), 64–73.Google Scholar
  10. Ess, C., & Jones, S. (2004). Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the aoir ethics working committee. In Reading in Virtual Ethics Issues and Contverseries (p. 357). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.Google Scholar
  11. Fishkin, J., & Habermas, J. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy, deliberative politics. In Estlund (Ed.), Democracy, deliberative politics (p. 33, 114–115, 120–121). New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Gastil, J., & Levine, P. (2005b). The deliberative democracy handbook. In The deliberative democracy handbook. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  13. Gibson, J. (2006). The contribution of truth to reconciliation: Lessons from South Africa. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 3(50), 409–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hattotuwa, S. (2004). Untying the Gordian knot: ICT for conflict transformation and peacebuilding. Dialogue, 2(2), 39–68.Google Scholar
  15. Jentz, N. K., & Zimmerman, M. (1996). Evaluation of 37 AIDS projects: Successful approaches and barriers to program effectiveness. Health Education Quarterly, 23(1), 80–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karefe, J. H. (2012). Participation through mobile phones: A study of SMS use during the Ugandan general elections 2011. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on information and communication technologies and development (pp. 249–258).Google Scholar
  17. Kohlbacher, F. (2012). The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(1), 1–30. From http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0601211.Google Scholar
  18. Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using Netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 31(1), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Larrauri, H. P. (2013). New technologies and conflict prevention in Sudan and South Sudan. In F. Mancini (Ed.), International Peace Institute – New Technologies and Conflict Prevention in Sudan and South Sudan (pp. 71–86).Google Scholar
  20. Nussbaum, S. (2012). Social media is changing the way we live and learn. In What school leaders need to know about digital technologies and social media (pp. 67–73). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  21. O’Malley, M., Leiner, M., Summe, D., & Knoeppfler, N. (Hrsg.). (2017). Thüringen: Braucht das Land Versöhnung? Kritisches Jahrbuch der Philosophie, Band 17. 17 ed. Jena: Thüringischen Gesellschaft für Philosophie e.V.Vorsitzender: Klaus-M. Kodalle.Google Scholar
  22. Saldana, J. (2013b). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). London: SAGE. [Kindle Edition] Available at Amazon.Google Scholar
  23. Sandelowski, M. (2000, August). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing and Health, 23(4), 334–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Skinner, B. F. (1985). Quoted in Bourdieu’s theory of practice as theoretical framework. In Repatriation to France and Germany, mir-Edition (p. 7). © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05700-8_2.
  25. Walther, M. (2014). Repatriation to France and Germany (mir-Edition) (pp. 7–16). © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05700-8_2.

Internet Resources

  1. Dajani, M. (2007). Wasatia Booklet. Ramallah: Modern Press. Accessed at 9 Sept 2015. Available at http://www.wasatia.info/articles/about-wasatia.html
  2. Dajani, M. (2010). Wasatia-the-middle-road article: الوسطية تحديات الواقع الفلطسيني. Accessed 12 Oct 2014. Available at http://www.wasatia.info/articles/about-wasatia/16-wasatia-the-middle-road.html
  3. Dajani, M. (2014). Wasatia NGO. Accessed 15 Jan 2016. Available at www.wasatia.info/aboutWasatia
  4. Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Accessed 6 May 2015. Available at from http://qix.sagepub.com/content/12/2/219.short
  5. Jorgic, B. (2013). Kenya tracks Facebook, Twitter for election “hate speech.” Accessed 20 Apr 2014. Available at http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/05/kenya-elections-socialmedia-idUSL5N0B4C4120130205, 05, 2-5.
  6. Leiner, M. (2015a). https://de.wikipedia.org. (n.d.). Wikipedia. Accessed 15 Sept 2015. From https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Leiner#cite_note-10
  7. Leiner, M. (2015b, January 13). Hearts of flesh not stone: AICGS. Accessed 17 Mar 2015. Available at: https://www.aicgs.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Leiner_HeartsWashington_2-3-2015.pdf
  8. Oliver P. Richmond, Ioannis Tellidis, Emerging Actors in International Peacebuilding and Statebuilding: Status Quo or Critical States?. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 20 (4):563-584Google Scholar
  9. Penna, S. E. Q. (2013). Qualitative data analysis with NVIVO. [Online 7 June 2013]. Accessed 20 May 2014. Available at from www.youtube.com: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YyVySrV2cM
  10. Perera, M. (2015). Reconciliation in Sri Lanka: The role of ICT. [Online 30, June 2015]. Accessed 20 Jan 2016. Available at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/reconciliation-sri-lanka-role-ict-mahesh-perera
  11. Schulz, D. (2012). YouTube – analyzing your interviews. Accessed 4 May 2015. Available at Southampton Education School. Available at http://www.southampton.ac.uk/~sesvideo/
  12. Toni, G. L. A., & van der Meer. (2016). Public Frame Building: The Role of Source Usage in Times of Crisis. Communication Research, 45(6), 956–981.Google Scholar
  13. UNDP. (2008). Action for cooperation and trust (ACT): Building lasting relationships islandwide. Nicosia: UNDP-ACT.Google Scholar
  14. Weitzman, P. F., & Levkoff, S. E. (2000). Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in health research with minority elders: Lesson from a study of dementia caregiving. Fields Methods, 12(3), 195–208.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X0001200302

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jena Center for Reconciliation StudiesFriedrich Schiller University JenaJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations