This module for Involving Anthropology presents an account of one of the plenary debates held at the International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences (IUAES) World Congress held at Manchester University, 5-10 August 2013. The module begins with a brief introduction to provide the context for the debate, which included two speakers for (Amita Baviskar and Don Nonini) and two speakers against (Helen Kopnina and Veronica Strang) the motion: ‘Justice for people must come before justice for the environment’. The introduction is followed by an edited transcript of John Gledhill’s welcome and introduction, the texts of the arguments made by each speaker for and against the motion (with the exception of Veronica Strang, whose presentation is being published elsewhere a summary of the comments and questions subsequently invited from the floor of the hall, and then a transcript of the responses of the presenters. https://doi.org/10.1080/00664677.2015.1102229 https://www.linkedin.com/in/helenkopnina/
MULTIFILE
Abusive online behaviors occur at a large scale on all social media, and have dire consequences for their victims. Although the problem is largely acknowledged, technological solutions remain limited to detecting and hiding abusive comments. More can be done to address abusers themselves. We propose to investigate the potential of conversational technologies to dialogue with abusers. In this problem description paper, we outline directions for studying the effectiveness dialogue strategies, e.g., to educate or deter abusers, or keep them busy with chatbots thus limiting the time they spend perpetuating abuses.
MULTIFILE
Objective: The aim of this study was to obtain insight in specific elements influencing the use, non-use, satisfaction, and dissatisfaction of ankle foot orthoses (AFOs) and the presence of underexposed problems with respect to AFOs. Methods: A questionnaire was composed to obtain information from AFO users to investigate the variables associated with satisfaction and the relation between these variables. A specific feature of this study was the systematic analysis of the remarks made by the respondents about their AFO. Quantitative data analyses were used for analysing the satisfaction and qualitative analyses were used analysing the remarks of the respondents. A total of 211 users completed the questionnaire. Results: Our survey showed that 1 out of 15 AFOs were not used at all. About three quarters of the AFO users were satisfied and about one quarter was dissatisfied. Females and users living alone reported relatively high levels of dissatisfaction, especially in the field of dimensions, comfort, weight, safety and effectiveness. Dissatisfaction with respect to off-the-shelf AFOs for the item durability was higher than that for custom-made AFOs. In the delivery and maintenance process the items ‘maintenance’, ‘professionalism’ and ‘delivery follow-up’ were judged to be unsatisfactory. A large number of comments were made by the respondents to improve the device or process, mainly by the satisfied AFO users. These comments show that even satisfied users experience many problems and that a lot of problems of AFO users are ‘underexposed’. Conclusion: To improve user satisfaction, the user practice has to be identified as an important sub-process of the whole orthopaedic chain especially in the diagnosis and prescription, delivery tuning and maintenance, and evaluation phase.
LINK
