Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T17:08:29.311Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using the Internet to Create Research Opportunities: The New Virtual Communities of TESS and the American National Election Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 June 2008

Kenyatha V. Loftis  and
Arthur Lupia
Kenyatha V. Loftis
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Arthur Lupia
Affiliation:
University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In recent years, evolving communication technologies have produced dramatic changes in how scholars communicate. Through mechanisms such as e-mail, wireless networks, and mobile communication networks, the volume of information that scholars can send—and the range of people to whom information can be sent—are radically different today than they were for previous generations. These changes in communicative capacity raise expectations of what scholars can accomplish. One source of raised expectations is the possibility for dynamic, large-scale, geographically dispersed collaboratories that evolving communication technologies allow. The promise is that large groups of researchers, working together, can generate insights more effectively and efficiently than they would if they worked alone or only with people in their own geographic proximity.

Type
Features
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , July 2008 , pp. 547 - 550
Copyright
Copyright © The American Political Science Association 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brady, Henry E. 2000. “Contributions of Survey Research to Political Science.” PS: Political Science and Politics 33 (March): 47–57.Google Scholar
Davis, Matthew M., and Fant, Kathryn. 2005. “Coverage of Vaccines in Public Health Plans: What Does the Public Prefer?” Health Affairs 24 (3): 770–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lupia, Arthur, and Sin, Gisela. 2003. “Which Public Goods are Endangered?: How Evolving Communication Technologies Affect the Logic of Collective Action.” Public Choice 117 (3–4): 315–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neteler, Markus, and Mitasova, Helena. 2004. Open Source GIS: A GRASS GIS Approach. 2nd ed. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Olson, Mancur. 1965. The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sears, David O. 1986. “College Sophomores in the Laboratory: Influences of a Narrow Data Base on Social Psychology's View of Human Nature.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (3): 515–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar