Search

Postcolonial theory can be paired with a values-engaged educative evaluation approach to resist imperialism and colonialism in evaluation spaces, de-Westernize conceptualizations of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and extend the capacity of culturally responsive evaluation. Beyond the joining of the values-engaged educative approach and postcolonial theory, Collaboration Research Network theories offer another distinct but complementary avenue for exploring structural power imbalance and invisible hierarchies in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics evaluation contexts. Using these three theories, values-engaged educative, Collaboration Research Network, and postcolonial theory, this qualitative study examined the perceptions and experiences of faculty and students at three minority-serving institutions participating in a science, technology, engineering, and mathematics Center. This study aims to bridge theories traditionally used in research with evaluation frameworks to reconceptualize concepts of diversity, equity, and inclusion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Interdisciplinary collaboration fuels research innovation and funders are increasingly offering long-term grants prioritising partnerships. However, a gap remains regarding the effective development, evaluatation, and sustainment of research partnerships; particularly those supporting marginalised populations like sexual and gender minority youth (SGMY). There is a concomitant need to expand research internationally to cross-culturally conceptualise SGMY's experiences, which information and communication technologies (ICTs) may facilitate. The International Partnership for Queer Youth Resilience (INQYR) is a research consortium comprising over 40 academic and community representatives investigating and addressing issues faced by SGMY in Canada, the United Kingdom (UK), United States of America (USA), and Mexico from an interdisciplinary perspective by: (a) conducting and disseminating interventions and exploratory research on SGMY's ICT use, and (b) training cohorts of SGMY scholars and practitioners. This article details INQYR's rationale and formation, including its objectives and organisational framework. Facilitators and barriers are discussed through reflection on INQYR's first operational phase from 2018–2021, considering collaboration with diverse stakeholders and settings; shared goals; language and technology barriers; personal and workload barriers; infrastructure; and power and historical tensions. Implications for other research partnerships and concrete tools such as author guidelines for large-scale research partnership formation, operation, and evaluation are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Any research collaboration can potentially transform the participants' understandings and enhance their professional relationships with one another and with significant others. If this transformation is to eventuate, research collaborators need to exhibit mindfulness with regard to their multiple relationships, as well as to the intentions and effects of their collaborations.These requirements of transformative research collaborations align with, and build on, Macfarlane's (2017a) influential, six-element representation of research collaboration as a moral continuum, through the authors' rationale for adding a seventh element to this representation, centred on the ethically informed fusion of third space (Bhabha, 1994) and creative understanding (Bakhtin, 1986). The authors argue that this fusion enables researchers to move beyond the self-regarding and other-regarding binary underpinning Macfarlane's representation, and also to progress to a new collaboration dimension that is fundamentally democratic in character as well as creative and productive in its effects.The evidence for this argument derives from the first-named author's Doctor of Philosophy thesis (Veles, 2020), which investigated the cross-boundary third space collaboration of university actors, and for which the second-named author was a supervisor/adviser. The authors posit this particular research collaboration as transformative through its creative fusion of third space and creative understanding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is a general understanding that higher education has characteristics of an "experience good" because the quality cannot be determined before receiving the service, which induces information asymmetry. In response to reducing the asymmetry, external assessment tools like international accreditations have emerged in higher education, which is especially evident in the field of business and management research. Quality is an integral part of reputation and legitimisation, so business schools actively engage in the accreditation race. In order to ensure legitimacy in the higher education market, business schools pay special attention to their intellectual output. It is reflected in the development of academic policies designed to encourage publication activities. It is pivotal to analyse how international accreditations contribute to the research performance and impact of business schools. The results of the study provide evidence that AACSB accreditation contributes to the research performance, however, it does not contribute to increasing the impact of the papers. Since the signalling research-based reputation is important for business schools, the study places attention on further examination of determinants of impactful research as international accreditation only determines the growth of quantity not the quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is increasing focus to review the societal impact of research through assessment and research excellence frameworks. These often link to financial and reputational incentives within the academic community. However, timeframes to demonstrate impact using these approaches are often long and are not designed to show benefit to service collaborators who require evidence of improvement and change to their services more immediately. Impacts that are measured this way may also miss out on unintended and positive impacts that occur as by-products of research, or through the 'ripple effect' that research may have on practice. Importantly, demonstrating how research makes a difference can improve the research culture in services, and motivations in service partners to become, and stay involved in research. This article describes, and provides access to, a tool called VICTOR (making Visible the ImpaCT Of Research) that was developed by a community of practice involving 12 NHS organisations through blending evidence from the literature, practice and service users. We describe the types of impact that have been collected by VICTOR and explore how collecting impact in this way might help research-practice partnerships and inform research methodologies and may be useful to show impacts alongside, and shortly after the research process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Only a small fraction of the Earth's total biodiversity has been described. This is particularly true of parasitic fauna, due to the paucity of taxonomic expertise, funding, and interest in parasites. It is expected that co-extinctions will become the main cause of species loss with potentially half of the parasite species becoming extinct prior to their discovery. This article addresses this issue and highlights case studies from the Otago Museum (OMNZ) (Dunedin, New Zealand), providing examples of successful collaborations between government organisations, museums, and parasitologists in bridging knowledge gaps in parasite diversity. The case studies presented focus on the parasitic helminths from opportunistic necropsies of stranded marine mammals and deceased birds. Collections from these case studies have doubled the size of the parasite collection at the OM, making this institution the most important repository of parasitic helminths in the country. We encourage such collaborations between museums, governing bodies, indigenous communities, ecologists and parasitologists in enhancing our knowledge of parasite diversity. Furthermore, we urge scientists to deposit both host and parasite tissues from surveys, vouchers, along with their respective metadata so that samples can be adequately stored and curated, thus ensuring that parasite collections become a legacy for future generations of scientists. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Refusal remains a core concern in processes of research across the sciences. Drawing on previous anthropological theorisations, this paper contemplates on the manifold 'arts' of refusal during ethnographic research praxis, drawing on diverse thematic experiences and contexts across coastal India, Malaysia, and Uganda. We argue for a concerted engagement with refusal as more than an act of withholding co-operation and as an expression of resistance. While recognizing refusal as a locally situated and historically contingent sensibility, we ask in what other ways might the more generative qualities of refusal be explored, paying particular attention to the performative nature of refusal itself that may entrench as much as reverse power differentials in the 'field'. Drawing on decolonial and post-development epistemologies and diverse experiences as scholars situated and working across different geographies and disciplines, we explore the many entanglements, articulations, and enactments that remain ubiquitous in everyday ethnographic research praxis through several thematic angles. These include the negotiation of uneven (and often violent) forms of research collaboration and cooptation, the enactment of benevolent sexism as an 'ethics of care', and embodied practices such as silence(-ing), together with play and humour in participants' critiques of scientific truth-telling. While illustrating subtler manifestations of refusal across ethnographic research-based encounters, we also contemplate pedagogical practices of un/learning (to 'read') and to teach the arts of identifying and productively working with the many appearances of refusal - both manifest and less visible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research programmes initiated by the EU have a significant role in shaping European research collaborations. Nevertheless, participation opportunities are quite unequal within the continent. The aim of this paper is to learn about the basic spatial patterns of these inequalities and discover their causes. The analyses focus on the Horizon 2020 (H2020) research and innovation collaborations; their spatial characteristics are studied by statistical and GIS tools. The paper attempts to assess the unequal positions in research collaborations by emphasizing the viewpoint of the East Central European countries and describing patterns that indicate severe East-West divide and significant core-periphery cleavage considering institutional and project participation as well as EC contribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large multinational teams of academics and activist-practitioners that span the Global North-South divide have become common in qualitative research because of the reliance of field of peace and conflict studies on “local” knowledge and expertise. Complex global emergencies, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, present the opportunity to (re)shape and (re)consider these endeavors in key some ways. This article focuses on the involvement of South-based activist-practitioners in three large North-South collaborations, one pre-pandemic (Beyond Words: Implementing Latin American Truth Commission Recommendations), one ongoing when the pandemic began (Gender, Justice, and Security Hub), and one launched during the pandemic (Truth Commissions and Sexual Violence: African and Latin American Experiences). Drawing on center-periphery framework, we adopt an autoethnographic approach, to reflect on how the pandemic has not only reinforced existing structural and institutional asymmetries through reduced funding, professional uncertainty, and personal loss and insecurity but also added some new ethical concerns. This reality has tested both our capacity and commitment to work toward the decolonization of knowledge in the field. In making this argument, we seek to contribute to the discussion on research ethics and the politics of knowledge production and sharing in qualitative peace and conflict research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Presently, there are six undergraduate HRSA-funded MCH pipeline training programs (MCHPTP) in the nation and they have gained significant momentum since inception by recruiting, training and mentoring undergraduate students in a comprehensive MCH-focused approach. This article describes the outcomes from the 6 training programs; and primarily Baylor College of Medicine–Texas Southern University (BCM–TSU's) collaborative strategy focusing on the MCH research training and outcomes, which align with HRSA's MCH bureau's missions. Description: Each MCHPTP offers trainees interdisciplinary MCH research experiences through intra/inter-institutional collaborations and partnerships, but BCM–TSU's MCHPTP was the only one with the primary focus to be research. As a case study, the BCM–TSU Program developed an innovative research curriculum integrated with MCH Foundations Course that comprised 2 hour weekly meetings. Students were split into collaborative research groups of 4–5 students, with multidisciplinary peer-mentors, clinical fellows and MCH research faculty from institutions at the world—renowned Texas Medical Center. Assessment: Since the inception of the MCH mentorship programs, all six MCHPTPs have enrolled up to 1890 trainees and/or interns. BCM–TSU Program trainees are defined as undergraduate students in their 1st or 2nd year of college while research interns are upper classmen in their 3rd or 4th year of college. The case study showed that BCM–TSU Program trainees demonstrated outstanding accomplishments in the area of research through primary and co-authorships of 13 peer-reviewed journal publications by 78 trainees, over a period of 3 years, in addition to dozens of presentations at local, regional and national conferences. Conclusions: The research productivity of students in the six MCHPTPs is strongly indicative of the success of integrating MCH research mentoring into MCH didactic training. The development of a diverse and robust MCH mentorship program promotes and strengthens research activities in areas of high priority such as addressing health disparities in MCH morbidity and mortality in the U.S. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In her recent article, Bender offers a timely reflection on research-practice collaborations (RPCs). In this commentary, we expand on Bender's main findings by reflecting on RPCs within the context of broader trends towards knowledge co-production. We offer some ethical reflections on two particular aspects of co-production that are relevant to any collaboration involving 'practice': epistemic equality and community participation. Both are necessary to shift the axis of these collaborations towards a mode of knowledge production that is action-oriented and empowering. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Youth offending has received significant attention in recent years in Queensland and across Australia. While the voices of young people who are offending or at risk of offending are evident in some studies, other reports do not identify them as key stakeholders. A recent university–industry research collaboration sought to prioritise the voices of young people engaging with The Lighthouse, a diversionary service within Townsville Aboriginal and Islander Heath Services (TAIHS), through the use of qualitative, photovoice methods. The primary aim of this photovoice project was to capture the perceptions and needs of young people currently at risk of offending in order to help shape local service delivery. A thematic analysis enabled the identification of four key themes. Participants felt unsafe and under surveillance in public spaces; they wanted more amenities where they could enjoy being in the community with their peers; they reported that peers and family were very important to them; and they appreciated services on offer at The Lighthouse and acknowledged these services supported behavioural change. The findings provide a unique contribution to policy and service delivery focused on young people at risk of offending and to the literature on the use of photovoice methodologies. IMPLICATIONS Photovoice is a creative, participatory method that value adds to research outcomes through participant skill development. Young people participating in, or at risk of, offending can contribute to research, in turn informing policy and practice to better meet their needs. Seeing through the eyes of young people provides a unique perspective on community inclusion, safe spaces, and transformative practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have been faced with challenges in maintaining interdisciplinary research collaborations. The purpose of this article is to apply and expand a previously introduced model to sustaining new interdisciplinary research collaborations: Forging Alliances in Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Research (FAIRR). FAIRR is a logic model that can be used as a guide to create interdisciplinary rehabilitation research teams. In this article, the authors propose expanding FAIRR by including strategies for sustaining interdisciplinary rehabilitation research collaborations: modifying inputs (resources needed to assemble a team and to conduct research activities), shifting activities (steps taken to move the interdisciplinary collaboration forward), and examining what impacts the fit between inputs and activities. Two examples are used to highlight the application of the FAIRR model to interdisciplinary collaborations during COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Against a backdrop of historic inequities between Northern and Southern scholars, the UK's Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) calls for "meaningful and equitable" research partnerships between UK-based academics and partners in the Global South. This paper draws on qualitative data from three workshops in the Ethiopia, Rwanda and the UK to interrogate GCRF funding criteria from the perspectives of African-based research partners. The GCRF criteria are considered with respect to African partners' experiences of, and aspirations from, such international research partnerships in order to enrich and extend ongoing debates about power relations in development research. The study finds that GCRF criteria do address many of the familiar historic concerns of African partners, while also identifying ways in which this and similar funding schemes may unintentionally reproduce structural inequities within the South. In highlighting these less visible equity concerns, the paper draws lessons for funders, academics and others concerned with establishing genuinely equitable research partnerships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: On 31 January 2020, the United Kingdom (UK) formally left the European Union (EU). Only a short transition period, until 31 December 2020, is available to negotiate collaborations for research in biomedical sciences and health care. Within the European scientific community, two opinions are common: 1) Brexit is an opportunity to obtain more funding at the expense of the departing British; and 2) UK colleagues should continue to collaborate in EU scientific efforts, including Horizon Europe and Erasmus+. To provide evidence for more informed negotiations, we sought to determine the contribution of the UK to EU's research in biomedical sciences. Methods: We performed a macro level scientometric analysis to estimate the contribution of the UK and EU member states, including those associated with EU-funding (EU+) namely Albania, Armenia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Faroe Islands, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, and Ukraine, to preclinical, clinical and health sciences. We searched the Web of Science database to count the total number of scientific publications and the top 1% most cited publications in the world between 2008 and 2017, calculated the performance efficiency by dividing the top 1% by the total number, and calculated the odds ratios to create a ranking of performance efficiency. We then compared the contribution of the UK to all the EU+ -based publications and the top 1% to the contributions of the ten EU member states with the largest biomedical research output and also compared the respective contributions to EU+ publications that resulted from collaborations with other regions in the world. Results: We found 2,991,016 biomedical publications from EU+ during 2008-2017, of which 19,019 (0.64%) were in the world's top 1% of the most cited publications. The UK produced 665,467 (22.3%) of these publications and had over two and a half times more top 1% most cited publications than the EU+ (odds ratio 2.79, 95% CI 2.71-2.88, p< 0.001). The UK's share in the EU+ co-publications with regions outside Europe ranged between 23.0% for the Arab League and 50.6% for Australia and New Zealand and its share of the top 1% ranged between 48.6% for the USA and Canada and 70.7% for the African Union. Conclusions: The UK contributed far more highly cited publications than the rest of the EU+ states and strongly contributed to European collaborations with the rest of the world during 2008-2017. This suggests that if the UK ceases to participate in EU scientific collaborations as a result of Brexit, the quantity and quality of EU's research in biomedical sciences will be adversely affected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The literature suggests that academic researchers with dual-appointment contracts, i.e. those employed concurrently by a university and an organization outside academia, have the potential to be more engaged in research collaborations with non-academic partners than colleagues contractually linked to a university only. Our results suggest that this relationship is not simple. Based on a sample of 7773 academic researchers in Europe, our findings show that the relationship between dual appointments and research collaborations is negative when the appointment involves an organization in the private sector and positive when the dual appointment is with an organization in the public sector. Our results also highlight that the profiles of academic researchers in dual appointments differ from those of academics mostly involved in research collaborations with non-academic organizations. The main differences relate to the academic researchers' educational paths, international mobility experiences and contractual status. The implications of these findings for research collaborations between the academic and non-academic sectors are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A bibliometric approach to assess trends in global tea research using literature in the Science Citation Index Expanded database from 1991 to 2014 has been conducted. Articles were analysed by scientific output and research performances of countries and institutions. The distribution of keywords in the articles' titles, author-supplied keywords and KeyWords Plus as well as citation and publication trends of tea-related articles was used to evaluate the research trends. The research output devoted to tea science increased greatly after the year 2002 indicating a paradigm shift that demonstrated that researchers became increasingly keen on biochemical relevance of active compounds in tea in mitigating emergent health challenges over classical tea research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A total of 1 917 publications of drinking water research in Africa from 1991 to 2013 were identified from the data hosted in online version of SCI-Expanded, Thomson Reuters Web of Science, for bibliometric analysis. The analysis included publication output, distribution of keywords, journals and subject areas, and performances of countries, institutions, and authors. Citation trends and highly-cited publications are also reported. We found that the publication output of related documents increased over the entire period of study. The results showed that 'water', 'drinking water', and 'oxidative stress' were the most frequent terms in publication titles, authors' keywords and KeyWords Plus. The top three subject areas were 'water resources', 'environmental science', and 'environmental and occupational public health'. The ten most productive institutions were located in South Africa and Egypt, and the University of Pretoria was the overall most productive institution. Thus, a quarter of all of the articles published were from South Africa. It was found that articles became increasingly collaborative with greater numbers of authors, page counts and bibliographies. More than half of the internationally collaborative articles were co-authored with researchers from Europe. French and US institutions contributed to the highest number of collaborative articles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Funding multi-institution centers of research excellence (CREs) has become a common means of supporting collaborative partnerships to address specific research topics. However, there is little guidance for those planning or managing a multi-institution CRE, which faces specific challenges not faced by single-institution research centers. We conducted qualitative research to identify the challenges faced by an Australian program of multiinstitution CREs with a view to identifying lessons for the future. This paper describes two of the most significant challenges: administrative complexity and investigator engagement. Administrative tasks (e.g.: establishing partner contracts and recruitment) were significantly more complex and time-consuming in the multi-institution CREs than single-institution research centers. Investigator engagement was hampered by a range of factors, including differing expectations within the investigator team and between the team and the funding body in relation to investigator roles as well as investigator capacity. We conclude with a discussion of key strategies that cut across the challenges: 1) early planning, 2) communication and 3) management capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is growing demand for robust evidence to address complex social phenomena such as violence against women and girls (VAWG). Research partnerships between scientists and non-governmental or international organizations (NGO/IO) are increasingly popular, but can pose challenges, including concerns about potential conflicts of interest. Drawing on our experience collaborating on VAWG research, we describe challenges and contributions that NGO/IO and academic partners can make at different stages of the research process and the effects that collaborations can have on scientific inquiry. Partners may struggle with differing priorities and misunderstandings about roles, limitations, and intentions. Benefits of partnerships include a shared vision of study goals, differing and complementary expertise, mutual respect, and a history of constructive collaboration. Our experience suggests that when investigating multi-faceted social problems, instead of 'rigging' study results, research collaborations can strengthen scientific rigor and offer the greatest potential for impact in the communities we seek to serve. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) to support research work is becoming increasingly common. This study set out to establish how ICTs are being used to support collaborative research in Kenya, and identify factors within the ICT ecosystem that contribute to their adoption and use. A mixed methods research design, involving 248 academic scientists in 4 disciplines across 4 major Kenyan universities, was employed. We find little diversity in forms of ICTs used to support collaborative research within the studied population. Several factors affect adoption and use practices, including availability and access to ICT resources, nature of the work, national and institutional ICT and research environments and the social cultural practices of researchers. We explain our findings using Venkatesh et al.’s Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model, which identifies four main constructs that affect adoption of technology such as performance expectancy, effort expectancy, facilitating conditions and social influence. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether a sparse and relatively small giant component (GC) will capture highly productive authors. Design/methodology/approach – The author used a geographically dispersed data set involving authors in the field of economics in ten countries in Southeast Asia and applied social network analysis methods to investigate the structure and dynamics of GCs. Findings – Results reveal that a GC, characterized by both low density and small size, can still capture a significant percentage (68 per cent of the top 25) of the most productive authors. There seems to be a topological backing for this occurrence. The number of direct connections (or “degree”) in the GC was correlated with research productivity, such that high-degree authors were almost twice as productive as low-degree authors. It is probable that productive authors having higher than average degrees may be the cause of the formation of the GC. The author hypothesize that irrespective of its size or sparseness, GCs in co-authorship networks may still represent the seat of main intellectual activity in the network. Originality/value – This is one of the first studies to quantitatively analyse the ability of a co-authorship-based less-prominent GC to capture prominent authors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic–industry collaborations are seen as a way to improve the translation and uptake of social science research. The ideal model is that of knowledge co-production, which regards effective collaboration as a reciprocal process between academic researchers and industry partners that is underpinned by jointly produced research outcomes. However academic–industry research partnerships can be inherently problematic, with poor collaborations impeding the translation and uptake of academic research. This article sets out to explore the realities of academic–industry collaborations in the social sciences through a study of Australian Research Council Linkage projects. Based on interviews with academic chief investigators and industry partners (n = 54) the article examines factors that influence the dynamics of research collaborations. Findings indicate that collaborations are inhibited and enhanced by particular individual and organisational factors and that the benefits of academic–industry collaborations go beyond simply improving the uptake of social science research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose -- The purpose of this paper is to attempt to provide a review of the growing literature on co-authorship networks and the research gaps that may be investigated for future studies in this field. Design/methodology/approach -- The existing literature on co-authorship networks was identified, evaluated and interpreted. Narrative review style was followed. Findings -- Co-authorship, a proxy of research collaboration, is a key mechanism that links different sets of talent to produce a research output. Co-authorship could also be seen from the perspective of social networks. An in-depth analysis of such knowledge networks provides an opportunity to investigate its structure. Patterns of these relationships could reveal, for example, the mechanism that shapes our scientific community. The study provides a review of the expanding literature on co-authorship networks. Originality/value -- This is one of the first comprehensive reviews of network-based studies on co-authorship. The field is fast evolving, opening new gaps for potential research. The study identifies some of these gaps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to compute and analyze the topological properties of co-authorship network formed between earth scientists in India. As a case study, the authors evaluate bibliographic data of authors who have contributed research articles in the Journal of the Geological Society of India, a premier earth science journal in India. Design/methodology/approach – Research articles totaling 3,903 records from 1970 to 2011 were harvested from the ISI Web of Science SCI database and analyzed using Social Network Analysis. Findings – The author productivity in terms of number of papers published followed Lotka's law with β=2.1027. A dense giant component was detected that spanned 73 percent of the network with a density of 0.0017 and clustering coefficient of 0.631, suggesting high level of knowledge diffusion and a rapid flow of information and creativity in this network. Local metrics were calculated using degree, betweenness and closeness centralities. A strong correlation was seen between degree and author productivity (number of works) and betweenness centrality and author productivity, suggesting that author's number of connections and controlling “in-between” position in the network may be providing the authors’ with the knowledge and resources to be more productive. Originality/value – The impact of human actions on the earth systems is a hot topic of research in India. This is one of the first works that investigates co-authorship networks of Indian earth science researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An abstract of the article "Music therapy research in dementia: Fostering a global approach," by Jeanette Tamplin, Imogen Clark, Hanne Mette Ridder, Orii McDermott, Helen Odell-Miller, Sari Laitinen and Christian Gold is presented.