(Paren)Theses in Hybrid Academia: Ontological, Practical, and Ethical Issues in Contemporary Scientific Referencing
Questions addressed (and partly answered): What does hybrid academia mean? Has academia experienced a challenge from inside (paradigms) or outside (internet, corona)? How has it reacted to it: by evolving, merging, or maintaining the status quo? Is the challenge really a parenthesis, or footnote in academia’s history?
What are (types of) references in academic texts (theses)? Are they always expendable? Should they be expanded? What has changed with a changed format and distribution (production, publishing, reception) of theses? Are there different categories of referential parentheses? Are footnotes challenged as a referential model and genre characteristic? Can hyperlinks be seen as a metaphorical model of the nature of academia (as a community and a practice)? How do or can textual introductions (sections on “State of research”, “Literature review”) tie into a digitized academic texture of texts (web of science)?
Are doctoral students admonished to use certain referential strategies, features or formats in their texts (article, thesis)? Why, and does that depend on the distribution form? Who promotes the change, and who maintains the status quo? Who benefits from either?
The practical work after the talk consists in sharing five printed pages of your own text production, look at the types of parentheses, their nature and impact, and be challenged to justify them.
Materials: Please bring a recent physical paper copy of your thesis text (5 pages) where you use references in parentheses.