A new initiative from the Pervasive Media Studio (currenly only with a Media Sandbox website) is the iglab.
I was a bit late, but the games were in full flow when I arrived. Simon Johnson was organising the evening and getting people to ‘swarm develop’ the games played. The focus was on ‘interestingness‘ than cunning technology and after each mini-play the assembled players were asked for ideas on how to improve the game they’d just played.
Only a couple of the Sandbox commissioned teams were present, Simon himself obviously, and the guys from ThoughtPie (flush from their national press coverage in the Guardian), but there were around 30 people which made for a pleasant buzz and enough people to have some players, some observers and lots of conversation around the edges on how to improve the games. Plus the wii was out, so plenty of stimulation for how to design, build and commercialise interesting games.
Bit of moblogging, bit of beer, a great mix of game developers, games research academics, and enthusiastic game players made for a good evening out and a healthly start to iglab.
Having been on the fringes of academia for so many years I have been able to balance theoretical knowledge and what ‘should be done’, with practical application and what ‘can be done’. Unfortunately or fortunately I’m not sure which, I had never had to explain the concept of plagiarism to a group of people that do not do a lot of academic writing. So you can imaging the looks I received when I started ‘banging on about’ self-plagiarism. This is a principle that I don’t recall being taught, but always knew was to be avoided. Now not to plagiarize ….. if you want to learn more about the topic I suggest you read Miquel Roiq MD pages.
The problem: You’ve written an abstract and submitted it to a conference. There is another conference in a very similar area/field as the first. Can you just send off the same abstract.
NO, you can’t.
This fact was greeted with much distress. “You can’t plagiarize yourself!’ were the cry’s, “plus the deadline is in two days I don’t have time to write another one”. My response was seen to be very unfair when I told them that they can’t submit anything then.
Well it’s amazing what can be done. With the deadline approaching (Midday today: 1st Feb) I was sent two abstract last night to review. They were edited and returned to their authors. This morning the confirmation of their submission has arrived and everyone was happy.
Hopefully the trials and tribulations caused this time will not be repeated, but it is something to watch out for. Happy writing
I’m always staggered by the amount of research that Sam’s doing. This has always been on her CV but never very public.
So I’ve finally persuaded her to put some of the more recent links up here.
As well as published work, we’re going to try and keep a running track of articles, posters and presentations that are in draft or submitted but not yet accepted. Obviously we won’t be able to go into full details before publication but hopefully there will be something that will give a flavour of what she gets up to.
Should we ever get around to some joint research or non-clinical stuff there will be more to talk about openly.
Research is always fun to do. Part of that is figuring out how to actually accomplish what you want to do. However the bit which all bosses want are the outputs. After a considerable amount of trawling through medical notes, patient interviews, postal surveys and then data analysis, I and several doctors have written and submitted five abstracts to the British Association of Oral and Maxiollfacial Surgeons annual conference.
Of course submission does not equal acceptance. So now we have the waiting game. To fill this time we are concentrating on producing articles for publication in peer review journals. Watch this space to find out our success rate and where the abstracts and subsequent articles can be read.