ICA CAT Business meeting

Ballard Room

May 25th, 2014

Chair: Kwan Min Lee (absent)

Vice Chair: James Danowski

Secretary: Lee Humphreys

Meeting began at 4:40pm

ICA President Announcement:François Heinderyckx

ICA 2015 will be held May 21-25, 2015. The theme of the conference will be “Communication across the Lifespan”. There are two hotels in San Juan, Puerto Rico.. The main conference hotel is the Hilton with the only private beach in San Juan and is family friendly. The second Hotel is about a 10-minute walk (or short shuttle ride) from the Hilton and has a casino in it. They are both about a 10-15 minute ride from the airport and about a similar distance to Old San Juan. The meeting room will be rotating (so that one division doesn’t have the same room all day) so that we can share the views of the ocean. There are direct flights from Europe and east coast from US, but there are no direct flights from west coast of the US. The hotels are $149/night and there is no need for extra visa (beyond what is needed for US).

Officer Update: James Danowski

CAT Chair Kwan Min Lee took a job at Samsung and was unable to attend the conference.

Review of minutes from 2013

George Barnett motioned to accept the minutes and Joe Walther seconded the motion. All approved.

ICA Board Update:

There are two new appointed positions:

1. International liaison: This is an appointed position for someone from within the division to run for 2-4 years, would represent CAT at board on internationalization and interface with division on ways to internationalize the division.

2. Student representative: This is not elected but appointed by the officers. This will be a person that grad students could come to with issues, concerns, ideas, etc. He or she will help the CAT officers to enhance the grad student experience within CAT and help better represent the grad student perspective within CAT leadership. It’s a 2-year position.

Members should email James Danowski to volunteer for either position.

ICA 2014 Programming Review:

Submissions:

CAT received 398 papers (more than any other ICA division)

344 individual papers

54 papers submitted for panel sessions

52% of papers were submitted by non-USA members

34% of papers were student-led papers

Panels:

CAT received 45 panels submissions

Only 4 panels met the CFP specification of a debate format with extensive audience participation.

-Remaining 41 mirrored competitive paper session format

-these panels were transferred to other divisions for consideration

Review:

In response to London feedback on reviews:

  1. We stressed the importance of written feedback and required written comments on each paper. This stipulation resulted in 275 volunteer reviews, a decline of 13%.
  2. We increased number of reviews from 5 to 3 on each paper, resulting in 67% increase in feedback but doubling the reviewer workload to an average of 6 papers
  3. We quadrupled the number of fixed choice rating scales, which closely paralleled APA paper requirements.
  4. We created a disqualification option based on
  5. Jim read every abstract submission (n=398!)
  6. If the complete paper was not a report of original research with the basic APA elements covered, it was disqualified.
  7. 44 submissions were disqualified (13%)

This garnered significant discussion within the business meeting.

  1. It was suggested that for formatting (APA) issues, it would be helpful to those disqualified to give the author an opportunity to fix the problem.
  2. There was also concern that this process would disqualify theory papers, which are important to the field.
  3. Discussion of “need to be reports of original research” in CAT submissions:
  4. Joe Walther suggested thatin the past many have interpreted the “need to report original research” more broadly and would suggest returning the papers to reviewers to let them determine the appropriateness of the paper/panel for the Division, rather than disqualifying them.
  5. Susan Robinson said that she liked the focus on original research, might suggest a committee to help review and define the process.
  6. Caleb Carr asked about disqualifying papers based on their meta information. If someone forgot to anonymizetheir paper, we could ask reviewers to self-identify if there are identifiers or conflicts of interest, rather than having the planner review all submissions for such mistakes.
  7. Stuart Geiger suggested that it would be important to make the requirements very clear in the CFP about what the ground rules are and what will be grounds for disqualification moving forward.
  1. Reviewers: 32% were non-US members, 30% were student reviewers
  2. Chairs = 29% were non-US members
  3. Respondents = 26% were non-US members
  4. All chairs and respondents were faculty members and not students, despite getting many heartfelt volunteers.
  5. Jessiva Vitak asked what is the role of respondents and whether we need them. Most of them were not well prepared and getting rid of them would allow for more time for Q&A or for longer presentations
  6. Jim Danowski said that every respondent could have downloaded the papers before to better prepare, but may not have been likely to do so.
  7. Katy Pearce saidthat it is important to better know what the respondents’ expertise are. But in her experience sometimes the respondent didn’t know much about the panel.
  8. Jim Danowski said we had each particular person self identify which panel session they thought they could respond best to.
  9. Katy Pearce suggested the title of the session may have been too vague.
  10. Caleb Car said I appreciate respondents but if I’m responding to a panel for which I am not qualified, it better to get rid of respondents to give panelists and audience more time to engage.
  11. Jim Danowski said when I founded this division I knew everyone, when it was only about 100 people, but it’s hard to know people’s expertise now that we’ve grown so much as a division.
  12. Ben Detenberg said this is a good discussion, when it works, its good, when it doesn’t work, its bad. But ICA more generally may be moving to a high density sessions so this could be moot.
  13. Jim Danowski said it’s unclear what exactly will be the future format. How many papers would you have accepted if you could have (twice as many)? How do you do that? Change the format to higher density.
  14. Discussion closed.
  15. Improving 2015 feedback:
  16. CAT proposed to President-Elect-Select Amy Jordan that ICA revise keywords used in 2015 meeting planning to improve matching papers to reviewer’s interests.
  17. This would likely result in improved feedback from reviewers to authors.
  18. In January 2014, the CAT acting chair prepared for each division and interest group word pair frequency lists extracted from 2013 and 2014 paper titles, keywords, and abstracts.
  19. It is hoped that these will be used to update the All Academic planning software keywords for 2015.
  20. Student travel support
  21. CAT received 15 student travel grant applications.
  22. We made 8 awards to international students, a 400% increase.
  23. Students enrolled in programs outside the USA numbered 3.
  24. International students enrolled in USA universities numbered 5;
  25. As a result we made 100% of student travel grants to international students.
  26. Increased funds were allocated to student support by eliminating expenses for plaques and certificates previously given in CAT.
  27. Fredrick Williams award
  28. Not given this year(award funds are being accumulated)
  29. Award Chair: Bob LaRose, Michigan State U, USA
  30. Dordick Dissertation Award
  31. CAT received 9 applications for the Dordick Award.
  32. Four judges rated applications, 50% of the judges were non-USA.
  33. The Dordick Dissertation Award winner is: Benjamin Mako Hill, for his dissertation: Essays on volunteer mobilization in peer production, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.
  34. Top 4 Faculty Papers
  35. #1Virtual Stereotype Lift: Effects of Arbitrary Gender Representations on Quantitative Task Performance in Avatar-Represented Virtual Groups by Jong-Eun Roselyn Lee, Ohio State U, USA, Clifford Ivar Nass (Deceased), Stanford U, USA, Jeremy N. Bailenson, Stanford U, USA
  36. #2Immersive Virtual Environments That Promote Environmental Behaviors Also Encourage Indulgent Eating via the Licensing Effect by Sun Joo (Grace) Ahn, U of Georgia, USA, Jesse Fox, Ohio State U, USA, Dooyeon Park, U of Georgia, USA
  37. #3The Impact of Structure on Response Decisions for Recipients of Distressing Disclosures: The Bystander Effect by Stephanie A Robbins, Ohio U, USA, Walid Afifi, U of Iowa, USA
  38. #4Stakeholders and Information Communication Technologies as Integral to an Active Shooter Emergency Notification Process by Keri Keilberg Stephens, U of Texas – Austin, USA, Jessica Lynn Barnes, U of Texas – Austin, USA, Michael Mahometa, U of Texas, USA
  39. Top 4 Student Papers
  40. #1Aggressive Language in Online Comments: Social Influence, Group Norms, and Effects of Anonymity by Leonie Roesner, U of Duisburg-Essen, GERMANY
  41. #2The Interplay of Intrinsic Need Satisfaction and Facebook Specific Motives in Explaining Facebook Addiction by Philipp Masur, U of Hohenheim, GERMANY
  42. #3Talking to an Agent in Smart TV: Effects of Modality Matching in Human-TV Interaction on Viewing Experience by Young June Sah, Michigan State U, USA, Soyon You, Samsung Electronics
  43. #4The protagonist, my Facebook friend - How crossmedial extensions change the concept of parasocial interaction by Jessica Szczuka, U of Duisburg-Essen, GERMANY, Elias Kyewski, U of Duisburg-Essen, GERMANY
  44. Joe Walther asked if we could at least recognize the names of the award winners, so each author was named and recognized.
  45. CAT Doctoral consortium:
  46. The 5th annual CAT Doctoral Consortium was our most competitive yet.
  47. Organized by Drs. Miriam Metzger, U of California at Santa Barbara, USA; Nicole Krämer, U of Duisburg-Essen, GERMANY; and Lee Humphreys, Cornell U, USA.
  48. We had 30 applications and accepted 16 PhD students, with 4 of them receiving funding from the Division.
  49. Fall 2013 Elections for New CAT Officers:
  50. Vice Chair: Lee Humphreys, Cornell U, USA
  51. Secretary: Marjolijn L. Antheunis, U of Tilberg, The Netherlands.
  52. Both new officers will assume their positions after the Seattle conference is concluded.
  53. News from the president
  54. New membership category: "Employment Exception" (The category includes faculty from across the globe who are part time or non-permanent employees, adjuncts or the equivalent at a university or research center.)
  55. A survey of the membership will, over the Summer, ask key questions related to the future of the ICA annual conferences. We really need the views of the members and insist that it is very important that they fill in the survey.
  56. The Board has approved a change that would replace the "Board members at large" representing five different regions within the Board of Directors, by 3 members who would be chosen by the membership among 6 people committed to internationalization and proposed by the nominations committee. This will be formalized into a proposal for change in the bylaws to be approved by the members on the ballot in September.
  57. Divisions and Interest Groups are encouraged to designate:

- a Student Representative who will pay particular attention to the needs, initiatives and interests of the student members of that unit and liaise with other Student representatives and the Student Board members for exchange and coordination;

- a member to act as Internationalization Liaison, i.e. a relay at the division level to contribute to the association-wide efforts to enhance the international nature of ICA, its members and its activities.

  1. The Board has established guidelines for ICA Affiliate Journals. One or two journals will probably be approved within the next few months.
  2. The "Environmental Communication" Working Group becomes a full Division. Meanwhile, a new Interest Group is created on "Sports Communication".
  3. Two ICA Regional Conferences will take place in the coming months, one in Brisbane, Australia (1-3 October, program finalized, 22 countries represented and involvement of regional Fellows); the other in Lodz, Poland (9-11 April 2015, co-organized with partner universities from 6 countries, call just published).
  4. The Board has approved a change that would replace the "Board members at large" representing five different regions within the Board of Directors, by 3 members who would be chosen by the membership among 6 people committed to internationalization and proposed by the nominations committee. This will be formalized into a proposal for change in the bylaws to be approved by the members on the ballot in September.
  1. Mobile Communication Organizational Issues:
  2. Lee Humphreys said that for about 10 years, there has been a consistent group of scholars who annually organize a mobile preconference at ICA. This year, we had over 100 people involved in the day and a half event. Given the longevity of the group, there has been some interest and discussion in forming a mobile interest group to help institutionalize this growing area of research.
  3. Jim Danowski said that Information Systems was concerned about CAT forming. There was a fear that people were splitting off, but that didn’t really happen. He could caution on a couple of grounds. First, you get paper slots based on how many submissions you receive, but the mobile interest group may just get a handful. Within CAT we have 35 slots so there could easily be several mobile panels within CAT. Second, it takes quite a while to get beyond the initial founding groups momentum and to go beyond to reach a broader group of scholars. In terms of resources, we get $3047 at CAT from central ICA.
  4. Katy Pearce said that it’s not that we want money, we want infrastructure. She also mentioned that on Twitter people indicated that they want plaques.
  5. FrancoisHeinderyck said an interest group is on the way to becoming a division. The process to form an interest group is incredibly simple. You only need 1% (42 people). The mobile preconference is the most stable of all preconferences. It might worth considering because of this. All it takes it to be 200 members for 3 years in a row to become a division, so if you can think for that now, it might help. The only thing to keep in mind is at least until 2019, we are locked into a zero-sum systems for panel sessions. So any new panels then it takes away from the rest of the divisions. We can’t just add a layer to the systems.
  6. Other Business:
  7. It was suggested that we reopen topic of panel respondents.
  8. Caleb Carr motioned to get rid of panel respondents on CAT panels.
  9. Jessica Vitak seconded the motion.
  10. Alex Leavitt said that he recently attended CHI where there was set time after every single paper for Q&A, rather than reserving the Q&A until the end so that each paper had time for questions.
  11. Veronika Karnowski said that she thought we should hold off the discussion until we know what the official ICA policy is.
  12. Susan Jacobson said that her panel had a lovely respondent, but suggested that maybe the chair and respondent be the same role.
  13. Jim Danowski called for vote to get rid of respondents:
  14. Yes: 30
  15. No: 16
  16. Abstain: 19
  17. The CAT reception is right after this is meeting. It is a joint party with Information Systems and Game Studies. It was organized by Lee Humphreys. See Lee for drink tickets. It will be just outside in the foyer since this room isn’t big enough for everyone. We also want to thank our co-sponsors for the event: the Murrow College at Washington State University and the Department of Advertising at the University of Illinois.
  18. Announcements:
  19. Keri Stephens announced that there will be a job opening this fallat UTexas Austin in organizations and technology.
  20. Jim Danowski motioned to thank Kwan Min Lee for service.
  21. Aaron Shaw moved and Ben Detenberg seconded the motion. All approved.
  22. Meeting was adjourned at 5:45pm.