New: The Journal of Humanities and Information Systems

Dear colleagues

It is my pleasure to announce a new journal, published by IBIMA, that will cater for articles in the interdisciplinary field of Information Systems and the Humanities (JHIS). This is a call for submissions for the first edtion of JHIS.

JOURNAL DESCRIPTION

The Journal of Humanities and Information Systems (JHIS) is an international peer reviewed and applied research journal that publishes papers on the symbiotic relationship between the two disciplines of Information Systems and the Humanities. Its unique focus will be research on Humanities-enriched IS, but other Humanities-Computing papers and case studies will also be considered. All papers will be subjected to a multiple blind peer review process. Papers should contribute to the existing body of knowledge of the domain in terms of theory and/or practice.

MISSION

JHIS aims to create an international forum to discuss and evaluate studies that implement theoretical constructs borrowed from the Humanities in various aspects of Information Systems, as well as investigations regarding the application of information technology in the Humanities. The creation of
publication opportunities for research with refreshing angles, some borrowed from other sciences, is a conscious effort to share interest and useful research and to counteract rigid procedures that are "stifling the intellectual advancement of our discipline" (Shoib and Nandhakumar, 2009).

SCOPE

Topics of interest for this journal include, but are not limited to, the following list:

• Linguistics and Information Systems
• History and Information Systems
• Art and Information Systems
• Philosophy and Information Systems
• Law and Information Systems
• Hermeneutics and Information Systems

CALL FOR ARTICLE SUBMISSIONS TO JHIS

Since there still are limited publication opportunities for Information System scientists (cf. Straub, 2009:v) in comparison with some other older, well-established disciplines, new opportunities should be embraced and used in order to build our discipline. Therefore, our colleagues are invited to submit some of their research outputs to this new outlet.

ASSOCIATE EDITORS AND PEER REVIEWERS

Please let me know if you would be interested to become an associate editor or peer reviewer of JHIS.
The editors and reviewers of JHIS should be like diamond miners taking a positive view while looking for "exciting forays into new research domains" (Straub, 2009:vii). The general aim in the review processes of this new journal will be to be inclusive and developmental rather than to perform "a
modern hygiene ritual", because we agree with Wastell and MacMaster (2008:64) that "a high rejection rate implies a collective failure of scholarship not the intellectual prosperity of a field".

For more information about the journal and submissions, see:
http://www.ibimapublishing.com/journals/JHIS/jhis.html

Jan H. Kroeze, School of Computing, University of South Africa
(editor-in-chief)

My source:
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 24, No. 451
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist

Launch of methods@manchester - research methods in the social sciences

methods@manchester is a web resource which brings together The University of Manchester’s internationally acclaimed expertise on social research methods. Visit www.methods.manchester.ac.uk to watch video clips of experts talking about specific methods: examples include Martin Everett’s leading work on Social Network Analysis, Wes Sharrock on Ethnomethodology, Nick Shryane on Structural Equation Modelling and Ian Plewis on Multilevel modelling.


You can also listen to a wide range of introductory methodological talks, whilst viewing associated PowerPoint presentations – for example Penny Harvey explains why and how anthropologists conduct ethnography and Vanessa May explains the rationale behind narrative analysis.

September 13 marked the start of the programme of events for the autumn semester, with seminars and short courses taking place.

On September 29 the Methods Fair includes methods-related presentations throughout the day (speakers include Martin Everett on social networks; Carol Smart on in-depth interviews; Nick Shryane on structural equation modelling); a display of posters by researchers and PhD students; stalls giving information on training opportunities, online resources, short courses and much more.

Go to the web-site www.methods.manchester.ac.uk and join the mailing list to receive a regular update on methodological events.


My source: ESA-ALL@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Image source: http://www.methods.manchester.ac.uk/methods/sna/index.shtml

Greenspan wins Dynamite Prize in Economics

Alan Greenspan has been judged the economist most responsible for causing the Global Financial Crisis. He and 2^nd and 3^rd place finishers Milton Friedman and Larry Summers have won the first – and hopefully last — Dynamite Prize in Economics.

In awarding the Prize, Edward Fullbrook, editor of the Real World Economics Review, noted that “They have been judged to be the three economists most responsible for the Global Financial Crisis. More figuratively, they are the three economists most responsible for blowing up the global economy.”

The prize was developed by the Real World Economics Review Blog in response to attempts by economists to evade responsibility for the crisis by calling it an unpredictable, “Black Swan” event. In reality, the public perception that economic theories and policies helped cause the crisis is correct.

The prize winners were determined by a poll in which over 7,500 people voted—most of whom were economists themselves from the 11,000 subscribers to the Real-World Economics Review. Each voter could vote for a maximum of three economists. In total 18,531 votes were cast.

Fullbrook cautioned that not all economics and economists were bad. “Only ‘neoclassical’ economists caused the GFC. There are other approaches to economics that are more realistic—or at least less delusional—but these have been suppressed in universities and excluded from government policy making.”

“Some of these rebels also did what neoclassical economists falsely claimed was impossible: they foresaw the Global Financial Crisis and warned the public of its approach. In their honour, I now call for nominations for the inaugural Revere Award in Economics, named in honour of Paul Revere and his famous ride. It will be awarded to the 3 economists who saw the GFC coming, and whose work is most likely to prevent another GFC in the future.”

Dynamite Prize Citations:

Alan Greenspan (5,061 votes)
As Chairman of the Federal Reserve System from 1987 to 2006, Alan Greenspan both led the over expansion of money and credit that created the bubble that burst and aggressively promoted the view that financial markets are naturally efficient and in no need of regulation.

Milton Friedman (3,349 votes)
Friedman propagated the delusion, through his misunderstanding of the scientific method, that an economy can be accurately modeled using counterfactual propositions about its nature. This, together with his simplistic model of money, encouraged the development of fantasy-based theories of economics and finance that facilitated the Global Financial Collapse.

Larry Summers (3,023 votes)
As US Secretary of the Treasury (formerly an economist at Harvard and the World Bank), Summers worked successfully for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, which since the Great Crash of 1929 had kept deposit banking separate from casino banking. He also helped Greenspan and Wall Street torpedo efforts to regulate derivatives.

The poll was conducted by PollDaddy. Cookies were used to prevent repeat voting.

For further information and interviews email: pae_news@btinternet.com

My source: (with additional links and image) Ciresearchers.net

Image source: http://sveccha.wordpress.com/2007/11/19/laws-of-and-black-swan/

Hodges' model: POLITICAL domain resources

'Problem patients?' 2 - Appease me do (not)

Many of the aspirations of nursing are just that - aspirational.

Appeasement and other similar 'power' associated concepts helps explain some of the appeal of Hodges' model - with its inclusion of a POLITICAL care domain. The needs of the ONE (interpersonal care domain) are diagonally opposed by the needs of the MANY (political care domain).

Just because I may approach someone (*evidently*) abusing medication / alcohol, over-eating, risk taking ... does not mean I am prepared to continue to nurse them and hence support them in that behaviour. Attempts to engage can be made and (must be) documented, as subsequent referrals and care will build on those care encounters. There is a marked difference between those individuals above who are often socially excluded, risk takers and people who are preoccupied with their health and mental health state. (Are such people stuck in the 'sick role?) Such patients may well seek new drugs and then instantly question the medication they are taking, never satisfied, they may query their care record and care while in hospital by virtue of their personality and anxieties.

I can reject negative behaviours and attitudes, but not the person. As a member of the health care team I can explain clear terms for future engagement should the patient wish. At the end of the day we constantly review: do they have mental capacity and to what extent does their behaviour present a risk to themselves, or others...? There is also a role for specific care management to be effected, to screen and prevent people reaching emergency services when this is repeated and unnecessary. The combination of some conditions such as long term respiratory problems and anxiety can create acute management problems, both for the individuals concerned, their family carers and care providers.

People do have choices to make, and so must take responsibility for how they exercise those choices.

Crucially this also needs to be explained to referrers - e.g. general practitioners / family physicians. For effective care management the inclusion of paramedic, crisis, social and intermediate care services in care management communication and coordination is also essential.

So, there is absolutely no need for a "current model of appeasement based care".

(This is a wind-up - surely? If not I am available for career advice.)

Yours truly and the patient's (even if it hurts),

Peter Jones

'Problem patients?' 1

Nurse Philosophy list

'Problem patients?' 1 - Wimps and space to care

I responded to a mail list discussion around 'problem patients' which began with the following main points:

• a relatively new nurse
• surprise that a significant minority of (my) patients are pathological wimps;
• even prior to seeing them they can often easily be spotted by examining their medical records;
• for example, I frequently notice that wimps have an obscene (and often downright odd) amount of special meal requests;
• current nursing philosophy encourages nurses to be endlessly supportive of wimps. i.e. to follow the often demonstrably wrong idea that "the patient is always right.";
• IMO nurses who claim they benefit such patients using the current model of appeasement based care are co-dependent personality types who enjoy feeling needed more than they enjoy actually helping people.

My first response is copied below with some additional points a further post will follow:

Patients are always a challenge in that they come in lots of 'varieties'. This is why we recognise the need for individualised, person-centred care. One variety is physical trauma laden to which the full-complement of the multidisciplinary team must respond. These patients and *their* crises bring out the best in us in terms of the skills and knowledge, team work they force us to exercise.

Among the plethora of other varieties there are those who are viewed as 'problems'. Like the Pepsi ad of decades ago they are variously and pejoratively described as -

multiattendin, attentionseekin, patiencesappin, bedblockin,
buzzabuzz-buzzin, heartsinkin, timewastin,
symptomfindin, carenumbin

.... patients!

If I receive referral information or heads up information on diagnosis of a 'tci' (to come in) that suggests the above is on the way, has arrived or worse "is on your caseload" - what do I do?

• Brace myself for impact?
• Go off sick (suffering loss of job satisfaction)?
  
• Become purely task or disease focussed, give up on effecting +ve change and improved outcome?
  
• Share collective anecdotes in the office - staff changing as a way to cope, de-stress, inject some humour?

OR do I -

• Avoid labelling them, or use these labels in a re-constructive way?
• Ask why are they 'who' they are?
• Gaze into their 'life history' and help them learn from it?
  
• Refuse to make gross assumptions, even based on previous experience with client - patient?
• Look at the individual wholistically - socially, educationally, behaviourally?
  
• Believe you can still make a difference (be the fly-half you can be and play ball)?
  
• Side step being tripped by foibles, behaviours and blatant displays of -ve obstructive ...... attitude that offend 'me'?
  
• Enter their space and do my utmost to find room for manoeuvre (this is the hardest test)?
• Speak to my manager(s) very tersely about protecting 'me' as a scarce resource and shout "OK where the hell is the gate keeper!"
  
• Or, as a nurse do you boldly go and seek out new strengths and new opportunities in the same way that Kirk, McCoy, Spock et al. (2264) go and seek New Life, New Civilizations...?

You may have an impossible lock to pick (in its most severe form this has become known as 'personality disorder'), but the nursing challenge is there in all its personal and professional glory. Address this personal - under-the-skin - slant - seek supervision. Be aware of the pit that some people fall into. The trap for some people with life chances they may have completely:

missed, never had, were stolen, denied,
took for granted, spurned,
totally - wasted.

Around the pit is the zone of judgement, but beware it is a singularity (no perspective) and very slippery.

• Otherwise go do your job: Nurse.

Nurse Philosophy list

Reference:

Kirk, McCoy, Spock et al. (2264) The Caring Imperative, To Boldly Go..., Four Quadrant Galactic Care Journal, Integrated Galactic Care Publishing Inc. itess-cube: 1701u-care4mesafelyandnicely

Forensic Nursing: bio-psycho-social (political) steps

I've been searching for a definition of forensic nursing and came across this by The International Association of Forensic Nurses (IAFN)…

“the application of nursing science to public or legal proceedings; the application of the forensic aspects of health care combined with the bio-psycho-social education of the registered nurse in the scientific investigation and treatment of trauma and/or death of victims and perpetrators of abuse, violence, criminal activity and traumatic accidents.”
IAFN 2002

While seeing bio-psycho-social in the definition comes as no surprise - the list of areas, situations and contexts that forensic nurses may work in is enlightening:

• Interpersonal Violence
• Forensic Mental Health
• Correctional Nursing
• Legal Nurse Consulting
• Emergency/Trauma Services
• Patient Care Facility Issues
• Public Health and Safety
• Death Investigation

In writing about the relevance of Hodges' model in this field there is the assumption that forensic nursing is specialized, but built - of course - upon fundamental nursing principles and values. These are carried forward in forensic nursing theory and practice - Beyond Tradition, Advancing Humanity -  as the IAFN slogan ably puts it. Being reminded yesterday of mental health law (always a good thing!) in training on Mental Health Act 2007, I can see just how well Hodges' model can support the early bio-psycho-social steps of the nurse learner.  Then if students go on to specialize in forensic care, the model's political care (knowledge) domain will continue to serve them well.

Nursing - a model with 'glocal' aspirations

Reading through Dan Pink's book again I came across this ....

The rise of Empathy has even begun to color parental advice. In a recent survey of of Australian information technology managers, 90 percent said they would not recommend that their own children pursue careers in the L(ogic)-Directed field of software engineering. What would they recommend their children do instead? "I'd rather my kids opt for nursing as a profession," said Joseph Michaels, who works for a telecommunications company in Sydney. "It has both global and local demand." p.165.

And wherever nurses travel so too must the reflective tools they employ.

In the paper on Hodges' model and Michel Serres I wrote the following:

The scholastic 3Rs alone are no longer sufficient to equip youngsters for current and future challenges. Wither health literacy without digital, information and visual literacy (accessibility issues acknowledged)? Carroll and Rosson (2007) recognise the moral imperative of participative design. If technology has the capacity to change, people must be involved in that change. Are governments granted the electorate they deserve? The ability to appreciate what lies between analysis and synthesis is the 21st century touchstone. In being educated to care for others, self, and the planet there is a need for a generic model that can be taught globally, across curricula, cultures, and ethnic divides. Janus-like we must combine the local and global, achieving glocal perspectives (Erikson, 2001, chap.19).

Daniel H. Pink (2006) A whole new mind, How to thrive in the new conceptual age, Cyan, p. 165.

Eriksen, T.H. (2001). Small Places, Large Issues, Pluto Press.

Michel Serres on W2tQ

Michel Serres: A blog