I have learned that in a federal government, each state can have their own law that another state doesn’t have. So for example state 1 allows same sex marriage in their state and state 2 doesn’t want to apply same sex marriage. Because of this the people in the 2 states would start a dispute. When will the constitution take place? How broad is the constitution that it allows one state to have a law that another state could not have? Relate the constitution to the disputes between states?

Do you know of any authors who discuss the compatibility of action research (AR) and actor-network-theory (ANT)?

In my specific case I plan to do my PhD field research in a series of participatory planning initiatives, where I will actively promote and propose the use of digital tools during the participatory activities (hence, the AR approach).

My preliminary review of the literature shows certain similarities between AR and ANT, mainly due to the importance given to the knowledge of the people being studied. While AR scholars should adapt their research plans to the needs, priorities and understanding of the community; ANT researchers should “follow the actors” to avoid using foggy explanations (such as social context, cultural aspects, etc.).

I am concerned, however, about my own positionality: can I use ANT to guide my analysis and approach if I am an actant with his own goals and motivations? Namely I hope that participants will be willing to experiment with the digital tools I propose, otherwise my research would be (partly) a failure.

I’m a graduate student with a focus on educational leadership. However, I have a subsidiary interest in research and teaching in the higher ed. Though my institution doesn’t offer any of these, I’m committed to get them, particularly the teaching experience, on my own. Does anyone know online platforms for those seeking teaching/research experiences?

I wonder what is your job after finishing PhD. in humanities or social sciences?
I’m a Phd student of social anthropology and this is my 4th year. I have always wanted to stay at the university as a professor, but I can see it’s pretty hard to get a job there.
The other option for me is to work in some NGO, integration center for foreigners or research center. Last 2 months I’m searching for a job like crazy, because my research grant will expire soon and I need money and something to do. All situation makes me quite stressed and I reproach myself that I haven’t done things differently.
So, what is or what was your career path during and after PhD?

I plan to enter graduate school (MA+PhD) in September 2018, which means I have something of a ‘gap year situation’ ahead of me [not in a strict sense, as I’ve been working for a number of years now]. I want to use this unstructured time ahead the best way I can.

If you were in my position, how would you spend these spare 12 months before grad school officially begins and the clock starts ticking? How would you prepare for what’s ahead, what would you focus on?

It goes without saying that I have already given these questions a lot of careful consideration, but I’m very curious to learn how others would approach this topic; especially, current PhD candidates, postdocs, and lecturers/professors. Knowing what you now know, if you could go back, how would you spend a spare year like that?

Some background:

  • My field is social/cultural anthropology.
  • My ultimate goal (grad school and beyond) is to prepare a CV and a research portfolio, which will aid me in launching an academic career in Europe.
  • I have a BA in anthropology and an unrelated MA,
  • I currently freelance (unrelated field); I have plenty of spare time, and can arrange my schedule in whatever way I see fit.
  • I live in a mid-size European city (not a capital); can’t move anywhere this year, but can likely do some limited traveling.
  • There’s a small anthropology department here, but I’m not affiliated with it, and never was. My degree is from the US.
  • I can speak the local language fairly well.
  • The grad school (next year) will be in a different county, and learning the new language will be one of my key objectives this year. The language of instruction will be English, however.

Note: Not sure if I made this clear, but I’m not looking for suggestions such as “travel for fun,” or “get a new hobby.” I want to use these 12 months in the most productive way possible.

In response to feedback from comments: I would like the advice focused on: setting myself up to do outstanding work in grad school and beyond (postdocs, etc). I am not concerned with the “getting into grad school” part here.

In the United States it is not uncommon to apply to academic jobs all over the country. Personally, I do not know a single person who limited his or her search to just one state (i.e. Massachusetts). That being said, the language of instruction and the key aspects of academic culture remain the same coast to coast.

In comparison, what is the situation like in Europe, particularly Scandinavia and Switzerland?

For example, given that the population of Denmark is comparable in size to that of Massachusetts, how does this affect the academic job market? Is it standard practice for PhDs & lecturers/postdocs located in Denmark to search for their first career placement across Europe [and beyond]? Or do they search for employment primarily on the national academic job market? How do the national differences in language/academic culture fit into this equation?

Background: I’m considering PhD/Academic Career in Europe. Ideally, I would like to learn the local language and assimilate as much as possible during the PhD. Given this long-term effort, I would prefer to continue on in the same country following graduation.

I’m especially interested in hearing from those with experience in the social sciences and humanities (working or studying in Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, or Switzerland/Austria). However, please consider contributing even if you do not fit this particular set of criteria. My own experience is in Cult/Soc Anthropology (USA).

I am currently running simulation models in STERGM with a 2 longitudinal networks in R using the statnet suit of packages, in particular the TERGM package. One network has 60 nodes, a density of 0.06 and a reciprocity of 0.05 and the other with 60 nodes, a density of 0.07 and a reciprocity of 0.08. My code for the STERGM is as follows:

g.net <- list()
g.net[[1]] <- g0
g.net[[2]] <- g1

st.g.net <- stergm(g.net,
formation = ~edges + mutual,
dissolution = ~edges + mutual,
estimate = “CMLE”,
control = control.stergm(init.form = NULL,
init.diss = NULL,
init.method = 0,
force.main = FALSE,
SA.restart.on.err = FALSE),
times = 1:2)

The output is as follows:

summary(st.g.net) # STERGM Results

==============================
Summary of formation model fit
==============================

Formula: ~edges + mutual

Iterations: 2 out of 20

Monte Carlo MLE Results:
Estimate Std. Error MCMC % p-value
edges -2.59118 0.07462 0 <1e-04 ***
mutual -0.25215 0.25989 0 0.332


Signif. codes: 0 ‘‘ 0.001 ‘‘ 0.01 ‘‘ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ‘ 1

  Null Deviance: 4583  on 3306  degrees of freedom

Residual Deviance: 1637 on 3304 degrees of freedom

AIC: 1641 BIC: 1654 (Smaller is better.)

================================
Summary of dissolution model fit
================================

Formula: ~edges + mutual

Iterations: 2 out of 20

Monte Carlo MLE Results:
Estimate Std. Error MCMC % p-value
edges -1.7461 0.1876 0 <1e-04 ***
mutual 17.3829 NA NA NA


Signif. codes: 0 ‘‘ 0.001 ‘‘ 0.01 ‘‘ 0.05 ‘.’ 0.1 ‘ ‘ 1

  Null Deviance: 324.4  on 234  degrees of freedom

Residual Deviance: 358.2 on 232 degrees of freedom

AIC: 362.2 BIC: 369.1 (Smaller is better.)

I am wondering if anyone has any insight into why I would be obtaining a Standard Error and p-value of NA. Is it due to the log-odds coefficient of approximately 17 translating to roughly 100% probability? Any insights would be greatly appreciated!

Good afternoon,

I am a scholar from the Netherlands. A couple of weeks ago I got feedback on my article for an American journal. She thought that I should have used better music videos during the focus groups, so that the participants got an allround view of commercial rap music videos.

I chose the most popular videos at that time (one female, two males), because I merely used the music videos as an ice-breaker/ lighten the mood and as a wat to make my definition of commercial rap music videos clear (I showed 30 sec of each video). She says that the chosen videos made it hard to measure the effects. But that is the thing; I did not choose these videos for a linear ‘watch – effect’ measurement. It is not an experiment and/or priming study!!!!

I am allowed to use music videos simply as an ice-breaker right? How can I explain this best?

Thank you!!!!!

Update

I will suggest treating the email communication as a figure and adding a note to the figure caption. IMO a caption is overkill when the appendix title is sufficient, but it’s an ok tradeoff to cover the bases.

Would still love to have other ideas to have another option or two.

(To be clear, I am not the student.)

Short question

When a study expands beyond the time communicated to participants, how does it affect reporting the results in the examples of communications with participants?

Background

The student conducted a study designed for three rounds. During Round 3 the study was expanded to four rounds; and in Round 4 it was expanded to five rounds.

All communication with participants up to Round 3 set the expectation that there would be only three rounds (i.e., letters to recruit participants, to select pilot study participants, and to give instructions for Rounds 1 and 2 in the actual study).

The appendices have copies of all of the communications. The earliest communications mention three rounds. None of the communications mentions the reason for expanding from three to four rounds or from four to five rounds.

Do you alter the early communications by inserting square brackets with corrected text as you would for a quote, such as “the 3[5]-round study”? Replace all mentions with a generic placeholder, such as “the study”? Add an explanatory note for the reader? Or just leave everything as is? Or …?

If it makes a difference, the paper follows APA style. The university has no standards for this situation.