Exploring e-science: An Introduction

Transcription

1 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication Exporing e-science: An Introduction Nichoas W. Jankowski Virtua Knowedge Studio for the Humanities and Socia Sciences Roya Netherands Academy of Arts and Sciences A number of terms are in vogue that describe the transformation of science through utiization of Grid computing, Internet-based instrumentation, and goba coaboration. For the purposes of this specia theme section of the Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication, the term e-science serves as an umbrea for these initiatives. This artice introduces the contributions to the coection and incudes a number of suggestions for extending the exporatory work performed to date, incuding attention to discipinary and contextua diversity and the importance of ongitudina research designs and historica awareness and of the socia shaping of technoogy as a theoretica concept to understanding the changes currenty underway in the scientific enterprise. doi: /j x Introduction Enhanced science, e-science, is one of many terms used to describe recent transformations in the scientific enterprise. 1 The overa assertion behind this and other nomencature is that the procedures and practices of traditiona forms of science in which schoars engage during their everyday professiona ives are undergoing radica change. Some commentators (e.g., Nentwich, 2003) suggest that the very essence of science is changing, particuary through empoyment of eectronic networks and high-speed computers two of the core components of e-science. This transformation is not imited to the natura sciences, where e-science has become, in some countries and discipines, the modus operandi, but is aso penetrating the domains of the socia sciences and humanities. The 11 artices prepared for this specia theme section of the Journa of Computer- Mediated Communication consider features and concerns reated to this transformation. Here, in this introduction to the theme section, I provide background to its deveopment and share a persona encounter with e-science during a recent research project. This background provides the basis for custering and introducing the contributions. In the concuding section I suggest severa areas where further exporation of e-science initiatives might proceed. But first, I address the most basic of concerns: What is e-science? Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 549

2 Terms and Definitions A variety of terms are in vogue to describe contemporary changes in the conduct of science. The most prevaent incude: cyberscience, cyberinfrastructure, and e-science. The first of these terms, cyberscience, is advocated by Nentwich (2003), who has authored perhaps the most comprehensive overview of these deveopments prepared to date, concisey refected in the subtite of the voume: Research in the Age of the Internet. Nentwich s definition of cyberscience is a-encompassing: a schoary and scientific research activities in the virtua space generated by the networked computers and by advanced information and communication technoogies in genera (2003, p. 22). Tracing the geneaogy of the term, Nentwich notes that it seems to have originated in a journa artice by Wouters (1996) and has subsequenty appeared in various artices and conference panes. Interestingy, the term has not been adopted beyond Nentwich s own institutiona turf, the Institute of Technoogy Assessment, part of the Austrian Academy of Sciences. Sti, his systematic investigation of how computers and eectronic networks are impacting science, particuary those facets reated to schoary communication and pubishing, is extensive and insightfu. 2 The term cyberinfrastructure is primariy rooted in initiatives based in the United States and was seriousy aunched as an idea and source for funding by the Nationa Science Foundation (NSF) in 2003 in what has become known as the Atkins Report (2003), entited Revoutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure. This tite refects the promotiona and visionary anguage present throughout the document: A new age has dawned (p. 31), The time is ripe (p. 12), a oncein-a-generation opportunity to ead the revoution (p. 32). This anguage is couped with a proposed annua budget in keeping with such promotiona, pubic reations stye: one biion U.S. doars. Basicay, cyberinfrastructure refers to an infrastructure of distributed computer, information, and communication technoogies. The deveopment is seen as parae to the infrastructures that aready permeate modern societies: roads and raiways for transportation, water, gas, and power networks for basic services and resources. In the words of the Atkins Report, If infrastructure is required for an industria economy, then. cyberinfrastructure is required for a knowedge economy (Atkins, 2003, p. 5). Not unsurprisingy, the first waves of cyberinfrastructure initiatives were situated in the natura and bioogica sciences, where arge voumes of data are invoved in research endeavors requiring high-speed computer processing: partice physics, astronomy, meteoroogy, and DNA research. These initiatives typicay invoved coaboration with staff at supercomputing research centers. The Atkins Report is not, to be sure, itsef a scientific document, but a manifesto. As such, it does not bother with conventiona schoary concerns such as quaification, criticism, and evidence. It can be and has been easiy dismissed on those grounds, but Hine (2003) reminds us that such perfunctory discarding of visionary statements misses opportunity for a potentiay vauabe schoary 550 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association

3 enquiry into how these statements are transated into initiatives and, possiby, how some changes in the scientific enterprise may be impacted by the ideas and funding reated to such visions. Athough it is too eary and not the purpose of this introductory text to examine in detai the impact of the Atkins Report, it is fair to note that the concerns expressed in the document have found institutiona and discipinary resonance. The NSF has estabished an Office of Cyberinfrastructure ( = OCI), suggesting a form of institutionaization. Various discipines have estabished their own committees producing reports and initiatives to investigate ways to take advantage consciousy of both the features and the funding being made avaiabe for cyberinfrastructure initiatives. 3 These initiatives have not remained restricted to the natura and bioogica sciences, but the humanities and socia sciences have aso entered the arena. The American Counci of Learned Societies, for exampe, issued a fina draft report ( on cyberinfrastructures for the humanities and socia sciences in Juy Other efforts to integrate the socia sciences are refected in the introduction of socia network anaysis as a too with which to study science communities. 4 Further indicators of institutionaization incude initiatives to make the genera pubic cyberinfrastructure-minded, such as EPIC: Engaging Peope in Cyberinfrastructure 5 and, arguaby, many of the initiatives that have introduced Internet research and digita studies into university curricua and research programs. 6 The term seected as identifier for this JCMC theme section, e-science, primariy has grounding in initiatives emerging from Europe, particuary the United Kingdom. John Tayor, then Director Genera of the Office of Science and Technoogy in the U.K., coined the term in 1999 at the aunch of a major funding program. Like the U.S. cyberinfrastructure initiative, the focus was on the natura and bioogica sciences, and was designed to process very arge voumes of data with the aid of Grid computing networks. Simiar euphoric statements about the transformation of the scientific enterprise as those surrounding cyberinfrastructure discourse marked the aunch and subsequent promotion of e-science. 7 A Nationa e-science Centre ( nesc/) was estabished in 2001, which has since become the primary vehice for coordinating and aocating funding for e-science projects in the U.K. On the NeSC website e-science is described and prediction of the future course of science is sketched: In the future, e-science wi refer to the arge scae science that wi increasingy be carried out through distributed goba coaborations enabed by the Internet. Typicay, a feature of such coaborative scientific enterprises is that they wi require access to very arge data coections, very arge scae computing resources and high performance visuaization back to the individua user scientists. In this description, as in many others, e-science is cosey associated with Grid computer network architecture that enabes much of the goba coaboration considered basic to e-science. 8 These features are expected, in turn, to spur deveopment of new, speciaized Internet-based toos for conducting research. Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 551

4 One of the deveopments in the U.K. that differs from the U.S. trajectory is initiation of a government-sponsored office to stimuate and coordinate e-science in the socia sciences. Caed the Nationa Centre for e-socia Science ( and aunched in December 2004, it invoves a decentraized structure of nodes engaging universities across the U.K. Most of the projects funded so far foow the e-science paradigm of Grid computer architecture, the one exception being the Oxford University node ( index.cfm), which takes a socia-shaping approach. Initiay, 11 piot projects received support to expore the appication of Grid technoogies in the socia sciences (Jankowski & Cadas, 2004). Athough this U.K. initiative is impressive in scope, the projects initiay funded are predominanty technoogy oriented, particuary with regard to appications of Grid computer architecture. There are other approaches receiving funding, as noted above, but these are in the minority and mainy reegated to a sma grants scheme. Regarding e-science overa, efforts are underway to export the British approach to the rest of Europe. 9 Some EU member states, however, have taken a different approach, as in the Netherands where the term e-science is avoided and preference given to e-research, which is seen as more refective of the work of both socia scientists and schoars in the humanities. 10 The artice in this issue by Wouters and Beauieu sketches this Dutch approach formay initiated in October 2006 and caed the Virtua Knowedge Studio for the Humanities and Socia Sciences (VKS; Much more energy can and, in the coming years, undoubtedy wi be expended on terminoogy. For the purposes of this coection, however, I am using e-science as the term embracing many of the features commony associated with how schoarship is conducted in a network environment, utiizing Internet-based toos and invoving coaboration among schoars often separated by arge distances on a goba scae. These features, it is caimed, contribute added vaue to the scientific enterprise when combined. In ist form, these features incude: Internationa coaboration among researchers; Increasing use of high-speed interconnected computers, appying Grid architecture; Visuaization of data; Deveopment of Internet-based toos and procedures; Construction of virtua organizationa structures for conducting research; Eectronic distribution and pubication of findings. The combination of these features differs across discipines and projects, and some scenarios of e-science are, as shown above, futuristic in tone and sense of technoogica inevitabiity. 11 The artices in this coection represent one of the first rounds 12 of socia science refection on this new vision of science. Not a of these features, it shoud be pointed out, are refected in the artices in this issue; additiona work, quite obviousy, remains to be undertaken. 552 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association

5 Background to Ca In the initia announcement for this coection I identified four areas as suitabe for submissions, which refected a custering of the above-mentioned features: Managing coaboration and communication among researchers separated by distance; Deveoping and using Internet-based toos for data coection, anaysis, and visuaization of findings; Archiving and providing access to data; Pubishing and disseminating resuts. Athough other topics and divisions are imaginabe, these four identify the main areas of activity in e-science. In many respects, the transition between traditiona scientific endeavors to e-science is underway and often transpiring without awareness or particuar concern. This was the case with a research project that I heped coordinate in the period Since that experience might be beneficia in understanding how features of e-science are becoming commonpace and essentiay transparent, I provide a sketch of the Internet & Eections Project beow. The Internet & Eections Project ( conceived in 2003, was concerned with empoyment of websites by poitica actors during eections. 13 The data coection for this cross-nationa study took pace in and was based upon a common theoretica framework and a shared methodoogica approach in order to examine how onine structures for poitica action were deveoped by a variety of poitica actors during the two weeks preceding each eection. Over 30 researchers coaborated to identify more than 5,000 websites reated to eections across Asia, Europe, and North America. Buiding on the experience and methodoogica procedures and toos deveoped by WebArchivist ( webarchivist.org), empirica projects were estabished around eections hed in seven Asian countries, the U.S., and in 11 European countries participating in the 2004 European Pariament eection. Here, three aspects of the research design are presented reevant to e-science: project management, data coection and anaysis, and pubication. Regarding project management, funding was secured to conduct a training workshop on the principes, procedures, and toos of the project, intended for researchers studying eections in Asia and Europe. For team members unabe to attend the workshop, specia meetings face-to-face and Internet-based were organized. The Internet meetings incuded both synchronous chat sessions and asynchronous discussion ists. In addition, a hep desk provided researchers opportunity to pose questions onine via instant messaging and emai during the data coection period. Regarding data coection and anaysis, in particuar during identification of websites reated to the eection under study, guideines deveoped by WebArchivist Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 553

6 were appied, which invoved consuting search engines, poiticay-oriented portas, and other depositories of potentia website addresses. A sites produced by poitica actors that seemed potentiay reevant to the 2004 eection were identified with the hep of an Internet-based too for this purpose. With this too, basic eements of the site were recorded and, subsequenty, sampes from the identified sites were drawn. Once sampes had been generated for each of the web spheres in the respective eections, members of country research teams coded the sites for the presence of more than a score of features. These sites were coded onine, using an Internet-based instrument deveoped for that purpose. Afterwards, basic tabes were generated from the master database and subsections of that database were distributed to the respective country research teams for further anaysis. Finay, regarding pubication, the project foowed procedures common in traditiona science, incuding preparation of conference papers, journa artices, and book chapters. In addition, members of the project prepared country reports on the eections studied that were avaiabe on a password-protected site. The manuscript of the book based on project research was competed in September 2006 (Kuver, Jankowski, Foot, & Schneider, forthcoming 2007) and is to be reeased as a conventiona schoary monograph. 14 In this project, the degree of internationa coaboration achieved woud have been impossibe without utiization of emai and discussion ists for communication among the research teams situated around the word. The toos for site identification and coding, avaiabe from a password-protected site maintained by coeagues in the U.S., provided the basis for generating data reiaby and efficienty. In these respects, the project captures the promise of e-science. Sti, probems were encountered on mutipe occasions. To begin, technica imitations restricted Internet-based data coection: The server to which codes of site features were to be upoaded proved incapabe of handing the amount of traffic generated by more than a dozen coders working at the same time during the 2004 European Pariament eection. As a stopgap measure, some coders resorted to first coding the sites on paper and then ater upoading the data in effect nuifying the primary advantage of onine coding by geographicay distributed researchers. Regarding managing a virtua research organization, substantia additiona demands were paced on the project coordinators in maintaining contact with team members stretching across Asia, Europe, and the United States. The sheer voume of emai communication suppemented by teephone cas and conferences, discussion ists, instant messaging, and chat sessions was enormous. One of the essons that emerged from our experiences with e-science during this project underined the importance of communication among team members, and that mediated forms of such communication require suppement with face-to-face contact in order to estabish a basis of trust for coaboration. Athough this "wisdom" may sound bana and obvious to those with experience working within or studying coaboratories, for us as novices to this feature of e-science, the reaization was profound. Speaking more generay, we aso came to fee that the organizationa 554 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association

7 infrastructure required by e-science initiatives may be, in fact, more important than the Internet-based toos for data coection and anaysis. Overview of Artices With this persona experience as a backdrop, I woud now ike to highight the contributions seected for this thematic coection. Athough these contributions, taken as a whoe, cover much ground, they obviousy do not address a issues reated to e-science, and attention may sometimes seem out of baance. There is perhaps excessive emphasis on aspects reated to distant coaboration and, at the same time, imited consideration regarding other topics such as archiving, visua representation, and data mapping techniques. These and other concerns with e-science merit attention in future coections. The artices in the coection are organized around three centra themes: conceptua concerns, researcher coaboration, and issues reated to research project features. Finay, two artices reate experiences with specific projects; these are appropriatey considered separatey as case studies of e-science. Conceptua Concerns Three artices dea primariy with conceptuay situating e-science initiatives. The first, prepared by Raph Schroeder and Jenny Fry, presents an overview of concepts and issues, entited Socia Science and e-science: Mapping Discipinary Approaches. The authors focus on those initiatives invoving high eves of computing, which is the emphasis usuay paced on cyberinfrastructure and e-science conceptuaizations. They aso address mainy initiatives in the natura sciences, eaving the socia sciences and humanities for other efforts. With these restrictions in pace, Schroeder and Fry construct a typoogy portraying issues reated to the study of e-science from socia science perspectives. This typoogy provides a framework from which a range of areas for research are identified. Nathan Bos and coeagues, a affiiated with the Science of Coaboratories (SOC; project based at the University of Michigan, construct a taxonomy of coaboratives in their artice entited From Shared Databases to Communities of Practice. The typoogy identifies seven types of coaboratories and is based on a review of more than 200 projects invoving distant coaboration among researchers. Athough this typoogy does not refect the frequency of the different types of coaboratories presented, it does provide a theoretica overview. Exampes of each type are profied in the artice, and the authors use this information to suggest a number of dimensions reevant to the types. This work is based on examination of coaboratories operating in the U.S.; one area for extension of this study, as suggested by the authors, is examination of the coaboratories situated in other regions such as the European Union. Pau Wouters and Anne Beauieu sketch deveopment of an initiative designed to stimuate features of e-science in the socia sciences and humanities in the Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 555

8 Netherands, caed the Virtua Knowedge Studio. They argue for adoption of a more genera and amenabe term to activities undertaken in the humanities, e-research, and propose reducing emphasis on Grid computing as the centra feature. Perhaps the authors main concern invoves incorporation of an interventionist strategy in the initiative with, at the same time, an approach that emphasizes critica study of science innovations. Athough a cassic issue in the socia sciences and often formuated in terms of scientific objectivity, Wouters and Beauieu situate the concern within present-day initiatives by governments regarding e-science and, in the process, profie an aternative to the approach of other nationa efforts at aunching e- science initiatives. Researcher Coaboration Jeremy Birnhotz and Danie Horn expore the roe of remote researchers in experiments invoving arge-scae and expensive equipment used for simuating earthquakes in civi engineering aboratories. In genera, preference is given to being there at the site of these experiments, and the authors extensivey document the rationaes for this preference among a wide range of persons invoved in these undertakings. By way of concusion, the authors expore possibe contributions that researchers-at-a-distance might make to such experiments, some of which may be appicabe to experimenta work in other discipines invoving off-site researchers. John Wash and Nancy Maoney examine the characteristics of coaboration across research teams in four discipines: experimenta bioogy, mathematics, physics, and socioogy. A factor anaysis suggests two categories of probems: those associated with coordination and those reated to cutura difference and security. Further anaysis identifies severa issues, ike size and distance, reated to difficuties in coordination. Probems reated to cuture and security are especiay present in arge groups of coaborators, particuary when, among other things, competition is prominent. Wash and Maoney suggest extending this study through ongitudina investigation, which woud aeviate uncertainty about the direction of those reations found. R. Sooryamoorthy and Wesey Shrum expore coaboration among scientists in South Africa, particuary the roe emai communication may have in this feature of e-science. They find a positive correation between emai use and coaboration, but not with regard to the number of resuting pubications. Further, they find no evidence suggesting pubishing benefits from internationa forms of coaboration. Athough these findings are imited to members of the schoary community within one deveoping country and are based on a singe survey, they do suggest, within that context, that coaboration via emai does not have a uniform and positive impact on productivity. Research Project Features Christine Hine, in an artice entited Connective ethnography for exporation of e-science, detais how features of e-science are being introduced in the bioogica 556 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association

9 subdiscipine known as systematics. Through ethnographic investigation, Hine expores the procedures and practices that are taken up by members of this subdiscipine as digitaization of specimen coections emerges. The particuar form of ethnography that Hine undertakes, termed connective ethnography, moves between onine and offine arenas in which the bioogists work. Hine suggests that this connective approach might be a usefu strategy for ethnographies of other e-science initiatives, providing iustrations of change in discipinary identities, institutiona structures, and poicy orientations as the move is made from traditiona to e-science practices. One of the centra features of e-science invoves managing arge bodies of data and making them avaiabe to other researchers. Samuee Carson and Ben Anderson consider how compicated this seemingy basic feature is through examination of four case studies invoving different forms and kinds of data. Entited What are data: The many kinds of data and their impications for data re-use, the artice considers a project with a arge-scae survey data set, one with digitized records of hundreds of thousands of artefacts and photographs, an anthropoogica team study with digitized fiednotes and other forms of documentation, and a dataset of astronomica observations compied by a dozen academic partners. One of the issues emerging from the comparison is the differing degree in the four cases to which documenting and processing of data is considered mandatory before suitabe for access by other schoars. Dan L. Burk expores one of the crucia non-technica concerns of e-science, ownership and contro, and focuses on the ega aspects of inteectua property. Drawing from Merton s (1973) cassica conceptuaization of researchers as members of a scientific community, Burk reviews the components of this position in reation to e-science initiatives and aspects of open source. He concudes by voicing reservations regarding the suitabiity of copyeft and other icensing systems to creation of the ideaized community of schoars posed by Merton and propagated by proponents of e-science. Case Studies of e-science Bridgette Wesses and Max Cragia focus on one feature of e-science, appication of Grid computer technoogy, within one of the piot demonstrator projects for e-socia science in the U.K. This project addresses the cassica concern in criminoogy with geographica variations in crime patterns and the reation between individuas and iving environments. One of the aspects that makes this project specia is utiization of very arge data sets to examine the resuting patterns. Achieving that aspect invoved considerabe in-house training, computer expertise, and unique soutions to probems encountered. Athough some of the difficuties encountered may have been reated to the reativey eary period in the deveopment of Grid technoogy, the experiences remain vauabe to possiby guide the monitoring of future Grid appications in socia science settings. Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 557

10 Finay, Frank Pappas and Fred Vok report on the deveopment of a project invoving features of e-science intended for museum educators associated with the Smithsonian Institute. This project is at a preiminary stage and, as such, concentrates on the preparatory phases for impementation of a system aowing coaboration among museum personne separated by arge distances. The overa objective of the project is to provide input for evauation of museum services. Achievement of this objective invoves preparation and training of personne for data coection, reporting, and dissemination of findings. The authors refect on these chaenges and suggest that the experiences may be appicabe to other cutura institutions concerned with accountabiity. Further Investigation of e-science With the above sketch of the specific contributions to the theme section as backdrop, I now woud ike to offer a few genera remarks regarding e-science. To begin, it is very much eary days in understanding this phenomenon. The number of studies in the form of conference papers and journa artices is imited, and there are but a few book-ength treatments presenty avaiabe (e.g., Hine, 2006; Nentwich, 2003; Oson, Zimmerman, & Bos, forthcoming 2007). In this sense, the artices in this issue of JCMC are performing pioneering functions and inevitaby refect the exporatory character of eary schoarship. This character is compemented in each of the artices by specific suggestions for further research; these wi be wecomed by coeagues concerned with exporing e- science empiricay. There is not, however, an overa research agenda in the artices or in this introduction to the coection; it may not even be possibe to formuate such for a deveopment as diverse and discipinary distinct as refected within e-science. 15 Sti, I woud ike to suggest a number of genera aspects, conceptua and methodoogica, that merit consideration during further exporation of the deveopment of e-science. To begin, contextua and discipinary differences are considerabe, and it is important to address these in further work. For schoars versed in the diffusion of innovations, it may sound as a base truism to note that adoption of innovations is not usuay uniform across cutures and ocaes, and that the intended uses and impacts can be radicay different from what is expected by the deveopers of the innovations. 16 So it may we become with the take-up of the features of e-science as they are adopted and modified by schoars far removed from the first wave of appications. If nothing ese, further investigation is essentia around this take-up and modification of e-science features across a fieds of schoarship: the natura and ife sciences, the socia sciences, and the humanities. Impicit in the above recommendation is the need for ongitudina investigation; the rate of take-up wi undoubtedy differ from situation to situation, and understanding the context and factors contributing to adoption is important. Awareness of the tempora dimension shoud, however, extend beyond conventiona ongitudina research designs and incude historica contextuaization of the adoption process. 558 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association

11 This aspect is we iustrated in Hine s examination in this coection as to how the bioogica discipine of systematics, with a history and reputation of conservatism, is approaching digitaization of coections of specimens. Equay impicit in the previous remarks is the need for awareness that adoption of an innovation, in this case features of e-science, invoves an active audience, as formuated in communication studies (e.g., Carke, 2000) and more generay known as socia shaping of technoogy (e.g., Wiiams & Edge, 1996). Debate surrounding the tension and reation of this ast notion with technoogica determinism (Smith & Marx, 2001) is a Pandora s box that best remains shut in these fina paragraphs. Suffice it to say that a critica and agnostic stance is recommended when exporing the causa reation between a technoogica set of innovations, such as those refected in e-science, and the context in which they emerge, such as a particuar schoary discipine. As a fina remark, the importance of nationa poitica and economic objectives in the deveopment of e-science is difficut to overemphasize. Generay, e-science initiatives have been payroed by government agencies, argey to assure competitive advantage in scientific deveopments. These incentives create tension, if not confict, with some of the e-science features stressing internationa coaboration among schoars. How this tension between e-science as an instrument for nationa economic strategy and e-science as the conduit for goba schoary coaboration pays out is a theme of much importance. Acknowedgments I wish to thank JCMC editor Susan Herring for her encouragement and advice at various stages in the deveopment of this specia theme section. A arge number of the contributions were presented at a one-day pre-conference workshop hed during the Second Internationa Conference on e-socia Science in Manchester, Engand, in June 2006; this face-to-face encounter provided vauabe opportunity for discussion of the manuscripts. Raph Schroeder and I organized this workshop, and both of us are gratefu for the coegia and critica spirit present at the event. More than a score of reviewers contributed assessments of manuscript drafts, anonymousy and with no more reward or remuneration than a thank you from the guest editor. Athough much more is merited, another expression of appreciation is appropriate here. Finay, this introductory text was presented to members of the Virtua Knowedge Studio in Amsterdam at an in-house seminar. The ensuing discussion provided inspiration for what I hope is an improved version; my thanks to these co-ocated coeagues. Notes 1 The term e-science sometimes refers to eectronic science, but the variant enhanced science more specificay reates to Internet-enhanced or cyberinfrastructure-enhanced science. The geneaogy of these and other terms was Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 559

12 sketched in a keynote address ( presentations/neeswordforum/keynote-intro/atkins/nees pdf) by Danie Atkins, hed at the Network for Earthquake Simuation (NEES) Word Forum in March A review has been prepared by Wison (2004). 3 One of these initiatives is caed CTWatch, Cyberinfrastructure Technoogy Watch ( and strives to engage the science and engineering research community in the news, ideas, and information surrounding the emergence of cyberinfrastructure as the essentia foundation for advanced scientific inquiry. Another initiative goes by the hande CI Outreach ( Empowering Peope to use Cyberinstrastructure Resources, and is concerned with soiciting and supporting the education, training, and outreach needs of the scientific research projects within the cyberinfrastructure community, targeting underrepresented groups such as women, minorities and the disabed. 4 See description of workshop Socia Networks and Cyberinfrastructure (SNAC; See the EPIC site ( where the goa is described as creating awareness of the opportunities afforded through cyberinfrastruture (CI) and by educating and training a diverse group of peope in a stages of ife from K-12 to professiona practice to fuy participate in the CI community as deveopers, users, and eaders. 6 For an overview of the Internet and academia, see Price and Nissembaum (2003), in particuar the chapter on communication studies and the Internet (Jankowski, et a., 2003). A recent indicator of simiar intent was announced by MIT and the University of Southhampton in November 2006 to estabish the Web Science Research Initiative (WSRI; 7 On the NeSC website some of these statements may sti be found. A quote from Tayor on the page where e-science is defined ( iustrates such visionary stye: e-science wi change the dynamic of the way science is undertaken. 8 A vast iterature on Grid computer architecture is emerging, but the basic metaphorica description of the Grid reates the deveopment to other aready-in-pace systems of services, ike the grid providing eectricity for househods. Foster (2003) and Buyya and Venugopa (2005) provide accessibe introductions, as does the Wikipedia entry for Grid computing. 9 This endeavor is evident in estabishment of an e-science Envoy who aso is director of the U.K. e-science Institute. A recent presentation by this envoy, entited e-science: Foundations for the European Citizen, was deivered in Barceona in September 2006 ( 10 Humanists are not adverse to some of the features associated with e-science; on the contrary, much work has been undertaken, particuary reated to digita archiving and visuaization of coections, and associations have been estabished; see, for exampe, the overview provided on the website for the Society for Digita Humanities ( The ca for contributions to the First Internationa Conference on e-socia Science ( hed in June 2005, iustrates the 560 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association

13 optimistic stance towards e-science: Beyond enhancing existing research methods, however, e-socia Science aso brings with it the prospect of articuating a radicay new research agenda and encouraging the formation of new forms of research community. 12 Another first round of contributions to this iterature is refected in the anthoogy prepared by Hine (2006). Many of the papers prepared for the NCeSS conferences aso merit incusion in any ist of such critica refections. And, the Science of Coaboratories project at the University of Michigan has a book schedued for pubication in 2007 (Oson, Zimmerman, & Bos, forthcoming 2007). 13 Further information on the Internet & Eections Project is avaiabe at an eary site of the initiative ( 14 At a presentation about the Internet & Eections Project, hed in November 2006 at the aunch of the Virtua Knowedge Studio, one of the participants in the subsequent discussion asked why such a traditiona mode of pubication was chosen for a project otherwise refecting innovative e-science features. My response, somewhat fippant, was that many of the contributors were up for tenure and needed pubications on their CVs refective of quaity schoarship pubished in a traditiona fashion. Such institutiona pressure can, in fact, be considered the primary deterrent to web-based innovations in schoary pubication, at east in the socia sciences. 15 Woogar (n.d.) and Woogar and Coopmans (2006) have prepared a series of questions reevant to examination of the uptake of e-socia science, a smaer sice of e-science. Athough vauabe, these initiatives do not constitute a systematic agenda for enquiry. 16 Athough it goes beyond the scope of this text to eaborate on this point, severa extended bibiographies on the diffusion of innovations are avaiabe, incuding one prepared by the NASA Headquarters Library ( ppm/ppm39.htm). References Atkins, D. E., Droegemeier, K. K., Fedman, S. I., Garcia-Moina, H., Kein, M. L., & Messina, P. (2003). Revoutionizing Science and Engineering through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the Nationa Science Foundation Bue-Ribbon Advisory Pane on Cyberinfrastructure. Washington, DC: Nationa Science Foundation. Retrieved November 13, 2006 from Buyya, R., & Venugopa, S. (2005). A gente introduction to Grid computing and technoogies. CSI Communications, 29(1), Carke, D. (2000). The active pursuit of active viewers: Directions in audience research. Canadian Journa of Communication, 25 (1). Retrieved December 19, 2006 from cjc-onine.ca/viewartice.php?id=561&ayout=htm Hine, C. (2003, September). Systematics as cyberscience: The roe of ICTs in the working practices of taxonomy. Paper presented at Oxford Internet Institute Information, Communication & Society symposium, University of Oxford. Retrieved November 13, 2006 from Hine, C. (Ed.) (2006). New Infrastructures for Knowedge Production: Understanding E-Science. Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association 561

14 Jankowski, N., & Cadas, A. (2004, November). e-science: Principes, projects and possibiities for communication and Internet studies. Paper presented at Etmaa van de Communicatiewetenschap [Day of Communication Science], University of Twente, the Netherands. Jankowski, N., Jones, S., Howard, P., Foot, K., Manse, R., Schneider, S., & Siverstone, R. (2003). The Internet and communication studies. In M. Price & H. Nissenbaum (Eds.) The Internet and the Academy (pp ). New York: Peter Lang. Kuver, R., Jankowski, N., Foot, K., & Schneider, S. (forthcoming 2007). The Internet and Nationa Eections: A Comparative Study of Web Campaigning. London: Routedge. Merton, R. (1973). The Socioogy of Science: Theoretica and Empirica Investigations. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Nentwich, M. (2003). Cyberscience: Research in the Age of the Internet. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Sciences. Oson, G. M., Zimmerman, A., & Bos, N. D. (forthcoming 2007). Science on the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Price. M., & Nissenbaum, H.. (Eds.). (2003). The Internet and the Academy. New York: Peter Lang. Smith, M. R., & Marx, L. (Eds.). (2001). Does Technoogy Drive History? The Diemma of Technoogica Determinism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wiiams, R., & Edge, D. (1996). The socia shaping of technoogy. Research Poicy, 25(6), Wison, T. D. (2004). Review of: Nentwich, M. Cyberscience: Research in the Age of the Internet. Information Research, 9 (3). Retrieved November 13, 2006 from ir/reviews/revs130.htm Woogar, S. (n.d.). Socia shaping perspectives on e-science and e-socia science: The case for research support. Unpubished paper, Nationa Center for e-socia Science. Retrieved November 13, 2006 from Woogar, S. (2002). Five rues of virtuaity. In S. Woogar (Ed.), Virtua Society? Technoogy, Cyboe Reaity (pp. 1 22). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Woogar, S., & Coopmans, C. (2006). Virtua witnessing in a virtua age: A prospectus for socia studies of e-science. In C. Hine (Ed.), New Infrastructures for Knowedge Production: Understanding e-science (pp. 1 25). Hershey, PA: Idea Group. Wouters, P. (1996). Cyberscience. Kennis en Methode, 20(2), About the Author Nichoas W. Jankowski is Visiting Feow at the Virtua Knowedge Studio for the Humanities and Socia Sciences. He has served as Visiting Feow at Oxford Internet Institute and as Associate Professor at Radboud University Nijmegen. Jankowski has been invoved in the investigation of new media since the 1970s and recenty coedited The Internet and Nationa Eections: A Comparative Study of Web Campaigning (with R. Kuver, K. Foot, and S. Schneider). Jankowski is co-editor of New Media & Society. Address: Virtua Knowedge Studio for the Humanities and Socia Sciences, Cruquiusweg 31, 1019 AT Amsterdam, The Netherands 562 Journa of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2007) ª 2007 Internationa Communication Association