Cover not available
Part of
Engagement in Professional Genres
Edited by Carmen Sancho Guinda
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 301] 2019
► pp. 179–196

Chapter 10
Researchers’ move from page to screen

Addressing the effects of the video article format upon academic user engagement and knowledge-building processes

| School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark
| School of Business and Social Sciences, Aarhus University, Denmark

The present study belongs to an extensive project that explores how academic knowledge is mediated through new generic structures and publishing formats and provides data comprising research video articles from JoVE, the international Journal of Visualized Experiments.

In order to deal with the implications of video formats in web contexts upon academic user engagement and knowledge building processes, we adopt a multimodal (inter)action approach in our analysis. We show how exploiting the complex hypermodal configurations contribute to changes in the balance of various types of knowledge and to the potential building of new ones. We also show that by embedding the video in a hypermodal context urges academic users to increase their engagement with the article in unprecedented ways.

Keywords: research articles, multimodality, knowledge building, types of knowledge, knowledge communication
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical frameworks
    • 2.1Knowledge communication and investigated knowledge types
    • 2.2Multimodality and multimodal (inter)action analysis
  • 3.Object of study: The JoVE articles
  • 4.Empirical analysis: Generic affordances with relevance for knowledge building processes
    • 4.1The video
    • 4.2Effects of the video and web format affordances upon the knowledge building process
      • 4.2.1Process 1. Access to new types of knowledge through multimodal and hypermodal means
      • 4.2.2Process 2. Access to multilayers of knowledge
      • 4.2.3Process 3. More repeated knowledge is made available
      • 4.2.4Process 4. Appearance of counterproductive knowledge
      • 4.2.5Process 5. Readjusted level of formality & diminished distance between researchers on screen and viewers
  • 5.Conclusions
  • References
  • Data
Published online: 24 April 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.301.10eng
References
Askehave, Inger, and Anne Ellerup Nielsen
2005 “Digital Genres: A Challenge to Traditional Genre Theory.” Information Technology & People 18 (2): 120–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolter, David J.
2007 “Remediation and the Language of New Media.” Northern Lights: Film & Media Studies Yearbook (5): 25–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davenport, Thomas H., and Lawrence Prusak
2000 “Working Knowledge: How Organizations Manage What They Know.” Ubiquity (August). DOI logo, [URL]
Engberg, Jan
2012 “Specialized Communication and Culture, Practice, Competence, and Knowledge: Implications and Derived Insights.” In Applied Linguistics Today: Research and Perspectives. Angewandte Linguistik heute: Forschung und Perspektiven, ed. by Leonard Pon, Vladimir Karabalic, and Sanja Cimer, 109–130. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Engberg, Jan, and Carmen D. Maier
2015a “Exploring the Hypermodal Communication of Academic Knowledge beyond Generic Structures”. In Discourse in and through the Media. Recontextualizing and Reconceptualizing Expert Discourse, ed. by Marina Bondi, Silvia Cacchiani, and Davide Mazzi, 46–65. Cambridge upon Tyne 2015: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
2015b “Challenges in the New Multimodal Environment of Research Genres: What Future Do Articles of the Future Promise Us?” In Trends and Traditions in Genre Studies, ed. by Natasha Artemeva, and Aveva Freedman, 225–250. Inkshed Publications.Google Scholar
Iedema, Rick
2003 “Multimodality, Resemiotization: Extending the Analysis of Discourse as Multisemiotic Practice.” Visual Communication 2 (1): 29–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jewitt, Carey
2012 “Technology and Reception as Multimodal Remaking.” In Multimodality in Practice. Investigating Theory-in-Practice-through Methodology, ed. by Sigrid Norris, 97–111. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kastberg, Peter
2007 “Knowledge Communication: The Emergence of a Third Order Discipline.” In Kommunikation in Bewegung: Multimedialer und Multilingualer Wissenstransfer in der Experten-Laien-Kommunikation, ed. by Claudia Villiger, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 7–24. Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kress, Gunther
2009 “What is a Mode?” In The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, ed. by Carrey Jewitt, 54–68. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Knapp, Alex
2015 Solving the Problem of Scientific Reproductibility with Peer-Reviewed Video. [URL]
Lemke, Jay L.
2002 “Travels in Hypermodality.” Visual Communication 1 (3): 299–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luzón, María José.
2013 “Public Communication of Science in Blogs: Recontextualizing Scientific Discourse for a Diversified Audience.” Written Communication 30 (4): 428–457. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maier, Carmen D., and Jan Engberg
2013 “Tendencies in the Multimodal Evolution of Narrator’s Types and Roles in Research Genres.” In Narratives in Academic and Professional Genres, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, and Carmen Sancho Guinda, 149–175. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2014 “Tendencies of Multimodal Gradations in Academic Genres Network.” In Genre: Encounters between Literature, Knowledge and Developing Communicative Conventions, ed. by Jan Engberg, Carmen D. Maier, and Ole Togeby, 113–145. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag.Google Scholar
Maier, Carmen D.
2016 “Hypertext and Hypermedia.” In The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media & Society, ed. by Debra Merskin. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna
2013 “Hybridism, Edutainment, and Doubt: Science Blogging Finding Its Feet.” Nordic Journal of English Studies 12 (1): 7–36.Google Scholar
Myers, Greg
2015 “Social Media and Professional Practice in Medical Twitter.” >In: Insights into Medical Communication, ed. by Maurizio Gotti, Stefania Maci and Michele Sala, 51–70. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Norris, Sigrid
2004 Analyzing Multimodal Interaction. A Methodological Framework. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 “Modal Density and Modal Configurations: Multimodal Actions.” In The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis, ed. by Carrey Jewitt, 78–91. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
2011 Identity in (Inter)action. Introducing Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis. New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “What is a Mode? Smell, Olfactory Perception, and the Notion of Mode in Multimodal Mediated Theory.” Multimodal Communication 2 (2): 155–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 “Developing Multimodal (Inter)action Analysis.” In Interactions, Images and Texts: A Reader in Multimodality, ed. by Sigrid Norris, and Carmen D. Maier, 13–17. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Pasquali, Matias
2007 “Video in Science.” EMBO reports 8 (8): 712–716. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pauwels, Luc
2002 “The Video-and-Multimedia-Article as a Mode of Scholarly Communication: Toward Scientifically Informed Expression and Aesthetics.” Visual Studies 17 (2): 150–159. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron
1998 Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2001 Mediated Discourse: The Nexus of Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wertsch, James V.
1998 Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Data

Bauer, Sarah, Meghan Conlon, and Meredith Morris
2014 “Using Fluorescent Proteins to Monitor Glycosome Dynamics in the African Trypanosome.” Journal of Visualized Experiments, 90.Google Scholar
Chen, Kevin G., Rebecca S. Hamilton, Pamela G. Robey, and Barbara S. Mallon
2014 “Alternative Cultures for Human Pluripotent Stem Cell Production, Maintenance, and Genetic Analysis.” Journal of Visualized Experiments, 89.Google Scholar
Fernandez, Robert, W., Nurilov, Marat, Feliciano, Omar, McDonald, Ian S., Simon, Anne, F.
2014 “Straightforward Assay for Quantification of Social Avoidance in Drosophila melanogaster.” Journal of Visualized Experiments, 94.Google Scholar
Raz, Noa, Michal Hallak, Tamar Ben-Hur, and Netta Levin
2014 “Dynamic Visual Tests to Identify and Quantify Visual Damage and Repair Following Demyelination in Optic Neuritis Patients.” Journal of Visualized Experiments, 86.Google Scholar
Samarian, S. Derek, S. Nicholas Jakubovics, L. Ting Luo, and H. Alexander Rickard
2014 “Use of a High-Throughput In Vitro Microfluidic System to Develop Oral Multi-Species Biofilms.” Journal of Visualized Experiments, 94.Google Scholar
Shoji, Hirataka, Takao Keizo, S. Hattori, and Tsuyoshi Miyakawa
2014 “Contextual and Cued Fear Conditioning Test Using a Video Analyzing System in Mice.” Journal of Visualized Experiments, 85.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Maier, Carmen Daniela & Jan Engberg
2019. Chapter 7. The multimodal bridge between academics and practitioners in the Harvard Business Review’s digital context. In Science Communication on the Internet [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 308], ► pp. 131 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 may 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.