Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (23)
Year of publication
- 2020 (23) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (23) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (23)
Keywords
- Blockchain (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- CPS (1)
- Case Study (1)
- Consensus algorithms (1)
- Creativity (1)
- Decentral Decision Making (1)
- Industrial Analytics (1)
- Industry 4.0 (1)
- Innovation in Organizations: Learning (1)
- Intentional Forgetting (1)
- Mellin (1)
- Pseudo-differential algebras (1)
- Sustainability (1)
- Systematic literature revieew (1)
- The Sharing Economy (1)
- Unlearning (1)
- airbnb (1)
- attitude-behaviour gap (1)
- children (1)
- commitment (1)
- digitalization (1)
- enhancement (1)
- experiment (1)
- forgetting (1)
- future curriculum (1)
- gaming (1)
- improvement (1)
- intention-behaviour gap (1)
- knowledge management (1)
- learning (1)
- mindset (1)
- mobile technology (1)
- online courses (1)
- online photographs (1)
- operator calculus (1)
- parental mediation (1)
- priming (1)
- prior knowledge (1)
- privacy paradox (1)
- process modelling (1)
- production process (1)
- research challenges (1)
- retentivity (1)
- rubicon model (1)
- rules (1)
- self-disclosure (1)
- sharing economy (1)
- singular manifolds (1)
- smartphone (1)
- social attraction (1)
- social media (1)
- symbols (1)
Institute
- Fachgruppe Betriebswirtschaftslehre (11)
- Institut für Künste und Medien (2)
- Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät (2)
- Bürgerliches Recht (1)
- Department Sport- und Gesundheitswissenschaften (1)
- Historisches Institut (1)
- Hochschulambulanz (1)
- Institut für Ernährungswissenschaft (1)
- Institut für Mathematik (1)
- Institut für Slavistik (1)
The game itself?
(2020)
In this paper, we reassess the notion and current state of ludohermeneutics in game studies, and propose a more solid foundation for how to conduct hermeneutic game analysis. We argue that there can be no ludo-hermeneutics as such, and that every game interpretation rests in a particular game ontology, whether implicit or explicit. The quality of this ontology, then, determines a vital aspect of the quality of the analysis.
Public blockchain
(2020)
Blockchain has the potential to change business transactions to a major extent. Thereby, underlying consensus algorithms are the core mechanism to achieve consistency in distributed infrastructures. Their application aims for transparency and accountability in societal transactions. As a result of missing reviews holistically covering consensus algorithms, we aim to (1) identify prevalent consensus algorithms for public blockchains, and (2) address the resource perspective with a sustainability consideration (whereby we address the three spheres of sustainability). Our systematic literature review identified 33 different consensus algorithms for public blockchains. Our contribution is twofold: first, we provide a systematic summary of consensus algorithms for public blockchains derived from the scientific literature as well as real-world applications and systemize them according to their research focus; second, we assess the sustainability of consensus algorithms using a representative sample and thereby highlight the gaps in literature to address the holistic sustainability of consensus algorithms.
The game itself?
(2020)
In this paper, we reassess the notion and current state of ludohermeneutics in game studies, and propose a more solid foundation for how to conduct hermeneutic game analysis. We argue that there can be no ludo-hermeneutics as such, and that every game interpretation rests in a particular game ontology, whether implicit or explicit. The quality of this ontology, then, determines a vital aspect of the quality of the analysis.
Data sharing requires researchers to publish their (primary) data and any supporting research materials. With increased attention on reproducibility and more transparent research requiring sharing of data, the issues surrounding data sharing are moving beyond whether data sharing is beneficial, to what kind of research data should be shared and how. However, despite its benefits, data sharing still is not common practice in Information Systems (IS) research. The panel seeks to discuss the controversies related to data sharing in research, specifically focusing on the IS discipline. It remains unclear how the positive effects of data sharing that are often framed as extending beyond the individual researcher (e.g., openness for innovation) can be utilized while reducing the downsides often associated with negative consequences for the individual researcher (e.g., losing a competitive advantage). To foster data sharing practices in IS, the panel will address this dilemma by drawing on the panelists’ expertise.
Missing out on life
(2020)
Mobile devices have become an integral part of everyday life due to
their portability. As literature shows, technology use is not only beneficial but also has dark sides, such as addiction. Parents face the need to balance perceived benefits and risks of children’s exposure to mobile technologies. However, no study has uncovered what kind of benefits and concerns parents consider when implementing technology-related rules. We built on qualitative responses of 300
parents of children aged two to thirteen to explore concerns about, and perceived benefits of children’s smartphone and tablet usage, as well as the rules parents have developed regarding technology use. Findings point to concerns regarding children’s development, as well as benefits for both children and parents, and ultimately to new insights about mobile technology mediation. These results provide practical guidance for parents, physicians and mobile industry
stakeholders, trying to ensure that children are acting responsibly with mobile technology.
Developing a new paradigm
(2020)
Internet users commonly agree that it is important for them to protect their personal data. However, the same users readily disclose their data when requested by an online service. The dichotomy between privacy attitude and actual behaviour is commonly referred to as the “privacy paradox”. Over twenty years of research were not able to provide one comprehensive explanation for the paradox and seems even further from providing actual means to overcome the paradox. We argue that the privacy paradox is not just an instantiation of the attitude-behaviour gap. Instead, we introduce a new paradigm explaining the paradox as the result of attitude-intention and intentionbehaviour gaps. Historically, motivational goal-setting psychologists addressed the issue of intentionbehaviour gaps in terms of the Rubicon Model of Action Phases and argued that commitment and volitional strength are an essential mechanism that fuel intentions and translate them into action. Thus, in this study we address the privacy paradox from a motivational psychological perspective by developing two interventions on Facebook and assess whether the 287 participants of our online experiment actually change their privacy behaviour. The results demonstrate the presence of an intentionbehaviour gap and the efficacy of our interventions in reducing the privacy paradox.
Stetig steigende Studierendenzahlen und Studierendenerwartungen der „Generation Z“ als „Digital Natives“ stellen Hochschulen bei gleichbleibenden Lehrressourcen vor vielfältige technische, didaktische, organisationale und curriculare Herausforderungen. Aufgrund ihrer Diversität und Heterogenität gibt es keinen einheitlichen Weg der digitalen Transformation im Hochschulsektor. Curricula, Studienstrukturen, Präsenzlehre und digitale Lehr- und Lernangebote müssen auf die jeweiligen Hochschulen, Zielgruppen und Kooperationspartner zugeschnitten werden. Dabei müssen auch neue Zielgruppen erreicht werden, z.B. Berufstätige und Teilzeitstudierende, und die Individualisierung sowie die nationale und internationale Studierendenmobilität gefördert werden. Kompetenzen für die Informationsextraktion aus Lern- und Studienprozessen, (Big) Data Analytics und Visualisierung, Künstliche Intelligenz und Augmented Reality müssen in Hochschulen aufgebaut werden. Von der digitalen Transformation sind alle Bereiche von Hochschulen betroffen, z.B. Präsidien, Fakultäten und gleichgestellte Einrichtungen, Universitätsverwaltungen, Forschungseinrichtungen sowie zentrale und dezentrale (IT-)Dienstleister, die sich mit schnell verändernden Anforderungs- und Rollenprofilen anpassen müssen. Ferner sind rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen zu betrachten, z.B. Datenschutzanforderungen, um die Potenziale von digitalen Lehr- und Lernangeboten und von digitalen Medien in der Lehre zu erschließen. Dieser Track diskutiert theoretische, konzeptionelle, gestaltungsorientierte, empirische und verhaltensorientierte Beiträge.