Search results for: transformative leadership theory

Authors: Gertraud Koch, Teresa Stumpf, Alejandra Tijerina García

Abstract:

Discourse analysis research approaches belong to the central research strategies applied throughout the humanities; they focus on the countless forms and ways digital texts and images shape present-day notions of the world. Despite the constantly growing number of relevant digital, multimodal discourse resources, digital humanities (DH) methods are thus far not systematically developed and accessible for discourse analysis approaches. Specifically, the significance of multimodality and meaning plurality modelling are yet to be sufficiently addressed. In order to address this research gap, the D-WISE project aims to develop a prototypical working environment as digital support for the sociology of knowledge approach to discourse analysis and new IT-analysis approaches for the use of context-oriented embedding representations. Playing an essential role throughout our research endeavor is the constant optimization of hermeneutical methodology in the use of (semi)automated processes and their corresponding epistemological reflection. Among the discourse analyses, the sociology of knowledge approach to discourse analysis is characterised by the reconstructive and accompanying research into the formation of knowledge systems in social negotiation processes. The approach analyses how dominant understandings of a phenomenon develop, i.e., the way they are expressed and consolidated by various actors in specific arenas of discourse until a specific understanding of the phenomenon and its socially accepted structure are established. This article presents insights and initial findings from D-WISE, a joint research project running since 2021 between the Institute of Anthropological Studies in Culture and History and the Language Technology Group of the Department of Informatics at the University of Hamburg. As an interdisciplinary team, we develop central innovations with regard to the availability of relevant DH applications by building up a uniform working environment, which supports the procedure of the sociology of knowledge approach to discourse analysis within open corpora and heterogeneous, multimodal data sources for researchers in the humanities. We are hereby expanding the existing range of DH methods by developing contextualized embeddings for improved modelling of the plurality of meaning and the integrated processing of multimodal data. The alignment of this methodological and technical innovation is based on the epistemological working methods according to grounded theory as a hermeneutic methodology. In order to systematically relate, compare, and reflect the approaches of structural-IT and hermeneutic-interpretative analysis, the discourse analysis is carried out both manually and digitally. Using the example of current discourses on digitization in the healthcare sector and the associated issues regarding data protection, we have manually built an initial data corpus of which the relevant actors and discourse positions are analysed in conventional qualitative discourse analysis. At the same time, we are building an extensive digital corpus on the same topic based on the use and further development of entity-centered research tools such as topic crawlers and automated newsreaders. In addition to the text material, this consists of multimodal sources such as images, video sequences, and apps. In a blended reading process, the data material is filtered, annotated, and finally coded with the help of NLP tools such as dependency parsing, named entity recognition, co-reference resolution, entity linking, sentiment analysis, and other project-specific tools that are being adapted and developed. The coding process is carried out (semi-)automated by programs that propose coding paradigms based on the calculated entities and their relationships. Simultaneously, these can be specifically trained by manual coding in a closed reading process and specified according to the content issues. Overall, this approach enables purely qualitative, fully automated, and semi-automated analyses to be compared and reflected upon.

Keywords: entanglement of structural IT and hermeneutic-interpretative analysis, multimodality, plurality of meaning, sociology of knowledge approach to discourse analysis

Procedia PDF Downloads 220

Authors: Murat Arıbaş, Uğur Özcan

Abstract:

Due to the increasing number of universities and academics, the fund of the universities for research activities and grants/supports given by government institutions have increased number and quality of academic research projects. Although every academic research project has a specific purpose and importance, limited resources (money, time, manpower etc.) require choosing the best ones from all (Amiri, 2010). It is a pretty hard process to compare and determine which project is better such that the projects serve different purposes. In addition, the evaluation process has become complicated since there are more than one evaluator and multiple criteria for the evaluation (Dodangeh, Mojahed and Yusuff, 2009). Mehrez and Sinuany-Stern (1983) determined project selection problem as a Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) problem. If a decision problem involves multiple criteria and objectives, it is called as a Multi Attribute Decision Making problem (Ömürbek & Kınay, 2013). There are many MCDM methods in the literature for the solution of such problems. These methods are AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process), ANP (Analytic Network Process), TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution), PROMETHEE (Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluation), UTADIS (Utilities Additives Discriminantes), ELECTRE (Elimination et Choix Traduisant la Realite), MAUT (Multiattribute Utility Theory), GRA (Grey Relational Analysis) etc. Teach method has some advantages compared with others (Ömürbek, Blacksmith & Akalın, 2013). Hence, to decide which MCDM method will be used for solution of the problem, factors like the nature of the problem, types of choices, measurement scales, type of uncertainty, dependency among the attributes, expectations of decision maker, and quantity and quality of the data should be considered (Tavana & Hatami-Marbini, 2011). By this study, it is aimed to develop a systematic decision process for the grant support applications that are expected to be evaluated according to their scientific adequacy by multiple evaluators under certain criteria. In this context, project evaluation process applied by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) the leading institutions in our country, was investigated. Firstly in the study, criteria that will be used on the project evaluation were decided. The main criteria were selected among TÜBİTAK evaluation criteria. These criteria were originality of project, methodology, project management/team and research opportunities and extensive impact of project. Moreover, for each main criteria, 2-4 sub criteria were defined, hence it was decided to evaluate projects over 13 sub-criterion in total. Due to superiority of determination criteria weights AHP method and provided opportunity ranking great number of alternatives TOPSIS method, they are used together. AHP method, developed by Saaty (1977), is based on selection by pairwise comparisons. Because of its simple structure and being easy to understand, AHP is the very popular method in the literature for determining criteria weights in MCDM problems. Besides, the TOPSIS method developed by Hwang and Yoon (1981) as a MCDM technique is an alternative to ELECTRE method and it is used in many areas. In the method, distance from each decision point to ideal and to negative ideal solution point was calculated by using Euclidian Distance Approach. In the study, main criteria and sub-criteria were compared on their own merits by using questionnaires that were developed based on an importance scale by four relative groups of people (i.e. TUBITAK specialists, TUBITAK managers, academics and individuals from business world ) After these pairwise comparisons, weight of the each main criteria and sub-criteria were calculated by using AHP method. Then these calculated criteria’ weights used as an input in TOPSİS method, a sample consisting 200 projects were ranked on their own merits. This new system supported to opportunity to get views of the people that take part of project process including preparation, evaluation and implementation on the evaluation of academic research projects. Moreover, instead of using four main criteria in equal weight to evaluate projects, by using weighted 13 sub-criteria and decision point’s distance from the ideal solution, systematic decision making process was developed. By this evaluation process, new approach was created to determine importance of academic research projects.

Keywords: Academic projects, Ahp method, Research projects evaluation, Topsis method.

Procedia PDF Downloads 586