Beyond the Human: Emergent Theories of Synthetics in Art Psychotherapy Research Pedagogies

The article considers the domestic experience of using information and digital technologies to evaluate the effectiveness of scientific and pedagogical research. The problem of quality and efficiency of scientific and pedagogical research, evaluation of their effectiveness using ICT is an important area for the domestic system of higher education and science. The digital transformation of society, the digital age of the use of computer tools significantly affect the requirements for tools for evaluating the effectiveness of scientific and pedagogical research. The author's interpretation of the concepts «information and digital technologies» and «evaluation of the effectiveness of scientific and pedagogical research» is offered. In particular, information and digital technologies are understood as a set of electronic tools, systems, devices, and resources that generate, store, or process data, as well as technologies for developing information systems and building communication networks. Under the evaluation of the effectiveness of scientific and pedagogical research using information and analytical systems, we will understand the definition of general indicators of scientific and pedagogical activity: several publications and citations in scientometric databases, availability of author profiles of researchers, ranking and rating of scientific and pedagogical workers, departments/laboratories/departments, institutions and establishments, information about achievements, list of publications, victories of students under the guidance, etc. The analysis of methods allowed establishing that the evaluation does not take into account such scientific products as textbooks, manuals, textbooks, glossaries, dictionaries, scientific reference books, bibliographic indexes, scientific catalogs, electronic resources, databases, etc. It is necessary to find new methods, approaches, and methods for systematic, complete, and objective evaluation of scientific and pedagogical research. The prospect of further research will be to determine the criteria and indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of scientific and pedagogical research using information and digital technologies.

ABSTRACTThis project aimed to investigate the types of digital technologies children under the age of five are using at home and assess the possible implications for early years pedagogy. The research, carried out between 2010 and 2012, was based in four European countries: England, Greece, Malta and Luxemburg. A mixed methods approach was employed to investigate what types of digital technologies were used by children under five years of age in their households and parental attitudes towards the use of these technologies. The project was developed into three stages. In the first instance data was collected from focus groups with the families to indicate what digital technologies are used in the households. In the second instance a questionnaire was designed for and completed by parents and children aged from birth to five years in order to reveal the extent to which children were making use of those technologies in the home. Subsequent to the analysis of the questionnaires, a further series of interviews were conducted with focus groups of parents and children to investigate their views in relation to the use of the digital technologies. Analysis of the data from the questionnaire revealed that children under five are heavy users of a number of digital technologies at home. Analysis of the qualitative data emerging from the interviews suggested that children are ‘digitally fluent from a very young age’. One of the key findings was that parents felt that their definition of an illiterate person no longer corresponded to the traditional view of someone who cannot read and write, but rather was considered as a person who cannot learn, unlearn, relearn and use digital technologies as part of their everyday lives. Firstly, this project concluded, therefore, that there should be a re-conceptualisation of young children's learning in early years pedagogy and early childhood settings as children under five are engaging with digital technologies in playing and learning at home and this cannot be overlooked by early years education. Secondly, it is suggested that in today's world of digital technologies early years educators should re-examine the way children learn and the way in which the early years workforce organise their learning environments.

Traditionally, it has been recognized that B2B sales are determined by the individual capabilities of salespeople. And the importance of digital sales technologies has not received much attention. However, recent technological advances have greatly changed the way B2B business operates. In particular, with COVID-19 pandemic, digital transformation in the overall B2B sales trend is accelerating more than ever. Experts point to digital sales technology trends to watch out for, such as task automation by sales journey, process integration, and expansion of online channel use in customer communication and contract signing. By introducing digital technology to B2B sales, you can not only automate existing activities, but also explore and discover new sales leads to maximize performance. B2B digital sales technology is already rapidly replacing the work of B2B salespeople by combining artificial intelligence and data analysis. Collaboration tools such as group video conferencing and workstream collaboration solutions, as well as sales force automation tools combined with artificial intelligence technology and digital support for non-face-to-face sales activities such as digital sales rooms etc. have been also widely used. With this change, B2B salespeople are also required to understand the essence of digital technologies and have the ability to use it for their purposes. The researchers conceptualized ‘digital technology, personal capability and literacy to understand and utilize digital technology, data and information

It is not that innovative technology in measuring medical outcomes with a digital or electronic means is a particularly new thing. In the early 1960s the Holter monitor for measuring ECG heart activity became available for use. At first these devices were not digital, nor were they even portable. But today a Holter monitor is clearly a digital device that can be used to monitor your ECG, but also can be used to record ECG endpoints. Is the Holter monitor the first medical digital device? If not, it is in the running. What is certain, however, is that it is not the last. About 2012 one of the authors of this editorial was a statistician on a study in which historically the endpoint of interest was gathered with a paper diary in which subjects noted each time an event happened, the analysis endpoint being the number of times the event happened over 24 hours. There was a company that we became aware of that could develop a device for patients in which they could record their events in a device. This made sense. We worked with them and we had an electronic means to collect these data and transmit them automatically into a database. Now, there became new concerns, such as what do you do when a patient says they have had 70,000 events in a day? These ended up, however, being issues that one could fix with intelligent design. Time goes by and one starts seeing Fit Bits being all the rage. People are recording steps and vital signs and other things to keep track of their own health. It does not take long to recognize that if an individual can do this with a phone then we ought to be able to collect similar sorts of information for clinical trials this easily. Why is this important? Well, it could mean less or shorter visits for patients during a clinical trial. The possibility of continuous 24-hour monitoring became more feasible. With more data, could we require fewer subjects? All kinds of possibilities became apparent. But more excitingly is that nonapparent ideas that could revolutionize medicine could take place. Improved data quality and improved assessment of clinical outcome can have profound implications for clinical research—increased accuracy, reduced need for clinical site visits, shift from treatment to prevention (due to longitudinal data monitoring), streamlined clinical decision-making, etc. However, these promises necessarily come with challenges—more data does not always mean better data, and data analysis must be done properly so that the results are convincing. Digital technologies are powerful tools that hold much promise in clinical research and development. However, the success of their implementation will require care: well-trained and qualified individuals with necessary medical and statistical expertise. Discussions among stakeholders in academia, industry, and health authorities, and development of new statistical methodologies to design and analyze clinical trials utilizing wearable devices and digital medicine products, will be inevitable for making progress in this direction. To some extent, the artificial pancreas notions that seem to have a lot of promise for those with Type 1 diabetes will most likely be powered by digital technology. With a digital device like Dexcom1 for monitoring of blood glucose along with an insulin pump which can now deliver insulin electronically, we see not only the possibility of better endpoints but better healthcare delivery. Will it take long to bring an implantable artificial kidney2 for testing in clinical trials for chronic kidney disease? If this device shows favorable risk–benefit properties for such a high unmet medical need, it could bring tremendous help and improve quality of life for many patients who are on hemodialysis. Will we see drug–digital combinations in the near future? On November 13th 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced approval of Abilify MyCite for the treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar I disorder, and as an adjunctive treatment of adults with major depressive disorder.3 Abilify MyCite contains an ingestible event marker sensor embedded into oral Abilify tablets. The sensor tracks if patients have ingested their medication and communicates this information to the patient and healthcare provider, thereby providing an objective summary of drug ingestion over time and offering a new way of monitoring patients. This is perhaps the first example of when two previously approved products (psychiatric drug Abilify and the ingestible sensor) are combined to produce a novel drug–digital medicine. Will there be more? The articles in this special issue attempt to reveal the potential of intelligent digital devices in clinical research and development. Izmailova et al.4 discuss various applications of wearable technologies in clinical trials as well as corresponding promises and challenges. The authors highlight the utility and use of wearables in many therapeutic areas while emphasizing the need for more scientifically rigorous experiments before wearable technologies can be widely adopted. Rogozinska5 provides nice examples of how the use of digital health technologies can potentially enhance productivity of drug development by increasing speed, quality, and product commercial value, and reducing cost and workload. The described regulatory, scientific, and operational challenges can also be viewed as opportunities for pharmaceutical companies to improve their business performance. Walton et al.6 describe a new type of clinical trial design, the Micro-Randomized Trial (MRT), for development of adaptive mobile health interventions. In this design, treatment options for each individual are selected based on carefully defined randomization algorithms, applied 100s or even 1,000s of times per individual during a study. The MRT is an example of an adaptive trial design to create an optimal treatment strategy for further testing in large randomized comparative studies. Koydemir and Ozkan7 describe innovative ways of using smartphones as biomedical sensors and platforms for collection, display, and/or sharing biomedical data acquired by wearable devices. The authors cleverly argue that smartphones can democratize advanced measurement and can potentially create transformative opportunities in various fields, including but not limited to medicine and education. Byrom et al.8 give a thorough overview of brain monitoring digital devices in neuroscience clinical research. The scope of applications is very broad and includes studies of pain, Alzheimer's disease, traumatic brain injury, epilepsy, sleep, etc. While data from many of these technologies cannot replace clinical endpoints, the authors provide a good rationale and justification for implementing them as exploratory tools in clinical trials. The high-frequency data can provide valuable insights into brain functioning, cognition, patterns of sleep, etc. which can also aid interpretation of the clinical outcomes. Finally, Sverdlov et al.9 discuss digital therapeutics—a new treatment modality in which digital systems can be used to treat medical conditions. It is argued that digital therapeutic technologies have broad applications, including cognitive behavioral therapies, gaming consoles for postdischarge rehabilitation, hybrid closed-loop systems, and many more. The authors also present business models and regulatory considerations for developing digital therapeutics, and provide some recent examples of digital therapeutics that have gained regulatory approval. Digital technology is in its infancy. There will be a lot of failure. The natural evolution of humans took millions (or billions?) of years, recycling imperfections or redundancies. Today, science and technology have reached a state when discoveries and advances in medicine and healthcare will be made at much faster speeds. It does not take a rocket scientist (or a clinical pharmacologist) to see that this technology will be revolutionary and we imagine that will change much of what is done in clinical trials and will have a major impact on how medicine is practiced in the future. No funding was received for this work. The authors declare no competing interests for this work.

In Norway, conducting research projects together with people with intellectual disabilities has been rare. This article provides reflections on conducting a pilot project where people with intellectual disabilities prepared a dialogue conference, together with academics, related to participation in everyday life in large shared housing. Two working groups were established and comprised academics, people with intellectual disabilities and staff. The following themes emerged through analysis of data; ‘facilitation for safety as support strategy’, ‘roles and processes in co-production of knowledge’ and ‘different voices and power’. Experiences and reflections from this pilot project show both tensions and pitfalls when involving people with intellectual disability in research. A key conclusion is that involving people with intellectual disability and staff had an impact, added values and new insights that without their participation would not have emerged.

Digital health technology is utilized in contemporary nursing practice and education. This review explored the scope of digital health applications and major trends in nursing research involving digital health in Korea using topic modeling. Our analysis of data using the Latent Dirichlet Allocation model identified four distinct research topics: nursing education using digital technologies (35.17%), hospital-based nursing practice using digital technologies (19.88%), digital technologies for health education (25.75%), and development of digital technologies to support self-management of chronic conditions (19.20%). Our findings reveal trends, current issues, and gaps in digital health nursing research.

Digital health in medicine: Important considerations in evaluating health economic analysis

Scrutinizing environmental governance in a digital age: New ways of seeing, participating, and intervening

Knowledge co-production has emerged as an important conceptual and processual tool in sustainability research addressing the needs of equity and inclusion. Indigenous communities and local people have engaged with the process of knowledge production, foregrounding their historical relationships with landscapes, based on their unique worldviews and knowledges. However, knowledge co-production, especially for multi-functional landscapes remains a contentious and complicated affair with enduring issues of power-sharing related to the different socio-political positions of stakeholders. This work explores the synergies and challenges in knowledge co-production for landscape re-design in the south Island of Aotearoa NZ through an assessment of the work done at the Centre for Excellence, Lincoln University. At this center, a multi-stakeholder team is grappling with designing a farm, through a transdisciplinary framework that attempts to include multiple worldviews. This work explores the various stages of the co-production process, analyzing the exchanges between various members as they prepare for co-production, the knowledge produced through this engagement, and how this knowledge is being utilized to further the goal of sustainability. Our results show that significant gaps remain between co-production theory and co-production practice which are a result of the mismanagement of the co-production process, the mismatch in the time and spatial scales of project goals, and the differences in the values and objectives of the different stakeholders. However, the process of co-production, though flawed, leads to the building of more open relationships between the stakeholders, and leads to some very meaningful knowledge products that address the multi-temporal and multi-spatial aspirations of multi-functional landscapes in Aotearoa NZ, while contributing to the broader scholarship on co-production in sustainability. Finally, both synergies and challenges prove meaningful when challenging the roadblocks to the inclusion of a diversity of worldviews, by clearly highlighting the places of engagement and why they were made possible. We suggest that knowledge co-production attempts in multi-functional landscapes around the world should attempt a similar assessment of their process. This can help build better relationships between scientists and IPLC, address disciplinary bias and marginalization of non-expert opinions, while also ensuring the relevance of the research to the multiple stakeholders of the land.

The circular bioeconomy is a highly scrutinized concept in Finland and internationally, with a high degree of polarization regarding forest utilization rates and distrust between certain actors. This offers an interesting case for an exploratory analysis of issues associated with knowledge co-production. Knowledge co-production entails the integration of different knowledge types and collaboration across multiple societal actors with potentially conflicting viewpoints and agendas. We interviewed key organizations operating at the nexus of science and policy in the processes of knowledge co-production regarding the circular bioeconomy in Finland, including representatives from ministries, universities, research institutes, innovation promoters, and interest organizations. Using qualitative content analysis, we assessed the actors' tacit knowledge and perceptions regarding 1) their role in knowledge co-production across knowledge types; 2) elements enabling knowledge co-production; and 3) tensions and needs/opportunities of knowledge co-production. To frame our data collection and analysis, we particularly draw from recent sustainability science literature on knowledge types in co-production. The findings reveal that the three main knowledge types – lay, expert, and scientific – are acknowledged by all actors, but are dealt with, to different extents, according to the roles played by different actors in the process of knowledge generation. Collaboration was reported to be largely project-oriented, enabled by funding, similar mindsets, and organizational/individual networks. Tensions included conflicting ideological positions held by various actors in the circular bioeconomy, mainly hampering the co-production of normative/target knowledge; funding-induced gaps and risks in inter-actor cooperation, mainly affecting process/system knowledge of the circular bioeconomy; and gaps and difficulties in cross-sectoral and cross-discipline engagement, mainly affecting predictive/transformative knowledge. Knowledge synthesis, policy-supporting knowledge, and transformative knowledge were perceived by several interviewees to be important avenues towards improving the sustainability potential of the Finnish forest sector.

Postmodern? No, simply amodern! Steps towards an anthropology of science

The article is devoted to the application of digital educational technologies in pedagogical research, in particular, the study of the possibilities of modern digital technologies, the description of the feasibility of their application and directions of development and use. The use of digital technologies in research activities is carried out through various forms of elearning. Various information technologies are used in organizing and conducting research using digital educational technologies. The intensive development of digitalization in all spheres of society will raise the organization and quality, of research work in the field of pedagogy to a new level. The use of digital technologies as a means of educational activity is a research and most important task of pedagogical situations. The study of this issue is caused by the need to identify the conditions that most affect the implementation of its target areas.

The widespread adoption of digital technologies raises important ethical issues in health care and public health. In our view, understanding these ethical issues demands a perspective that looks beyond the technology itself to include the sociotechnical system in which it is situated. In this sense, a sociotechnical system refers to the broader collection of material devices, interpersonal relationships, organizational policies, corporate contracts, and government regulations that shape the ways in which digital health technologies are adopted and used. Bioethical approaches to the assessment of digital health technologies are typically confined to ethical issues raised by features of the technology itself. We suggest that an ethical perspective confined to functions of the technology is insufficient to assess the broader impact of the adoption of technologies on the care environment and the broader health-related ecosystem of which it is a part. In this paper we review existing approaches to the bioethics of digital health, and draw on concepts from design ethics and science & technology studies (STS) to critique a narrow view of the bioethics of digital health. We then describe the sociotechnical system produced by digital health technologies when adopted in health care environments, and outline the various considerations that demand attention for a comprehensive ethical analysis of digital health technologies in this broad perspective. We conclude by outlining the importance of social justice for ethical analysis from a sociotechnical perspective.

continuous improvement [4] .Our food system is also facing a multitude of shared challenges that need to be managed simultaneously:• increasing dependence on a global supply chain to source raw materials and partially processed food products, • growing pace and volumes of food trade

As digital media have become increasingly integrated in everyday life, there have been calls for new literacies to become an integral part of language and literacy education. Yet traditional approaches to digital technologies, which position technology as an occasional add-on to existing pedagogies, continue to persist in Australian school settings. The role of teachers and their approaches to digital technologies have been acknowledged in efforts to explain the challenges associated with teaching and learning new literacies. However, little is known about what shapes their encounters with digital technologies beyond institutional constraints. The research reported in this thesis aimed to address this gap. The study was informed by the body of work known as Literacy Studies which conceptualises literacy as a social practice and emphasises the close and complex relationships between literacy practices, technology, socio-cultural contexts, identities, beliefs and values. The study investigated language and literacy teachers’ everyday digital literacy practices to help explain why teaching and learning new literacies in school settings continues to represent a challenge. It focused on teachers’ ways of thinking about digital technologies: how they are constructed, and how they shape their experiences. Detailed accounts of teachers’ digital literacy practices promised to highlight what encourages and what constrains their engagement with new literacies in their everyday lives. Located within the theory and practice of qualitative inquiry, the research employed a case study approach, focusing on five language and literacy teachers working in Melbourne, Australia, who volunteered to participate. The four female teachers and one male teacher ranged in age from 31 to 53. The data sources included demographic profiles with background information about the participants, participant-generated digital photographs of their everyday practices with technologies, individual interviews and online observations over a period of two to three months in social networking spaces including professional blogs, Twitter and Facebook. Data analysis involved two intertwined approaches: visual data analysis and thematic analysis. The study found that the participants’ digital literacy practices ranged from the traditional, resembling conventional literacies performed in a more technologised way, to the ‘new’, which were multimodal, participatory, collaborative, creative and hybrid in character. The combination of traditional and new was identified across all the cases with some practices more dominant than others. The participants’ traditional literacy practices supported their everyday lives effectively, while the new literacy practices provided them with opportunities for engaging in new experiences and constructing new identities and relationships. Notably, in the context of their everyday practices, three of the five participants engaged in informal professional learning online through Personal Learning Networks (PLNs), a form of learning that was participant-driven, active, communication-based and participatory. The participants’ digital mindsets shaped their digital literacy practices. These mindsets comprised beliefs associated with everyday life and understandings of the opportunities offered and supported by technologies, that is, their affordances. Their mindsets were constructed under the influence of local contexts but also of the broader global context in which digital technologies are designed and produced. The practices associated with new literacies required creative, elaborated and critical assumptions about what was possible in digital environments. However, thinking about technologies in terms of their affordances was challenging for some of the participants: their capacity to conceptualise the possibilities provided by technologies and the critical awareness required to scrutinise the opportunities and risks associated with them varied. Importantly, all the participants were reluctant to scrutinise their dominant ways of thinking about digital technologies. The study contributes to the field of Literacy Studies by offering an explanation of why teaching new literacies continues to be challenging. It concludes that teachers’ digital mindsets shape their encounters with digital technologies in important ways. As some teachers may experience difficulties with conceptualising new literacies, it is time to re-think in-service and pre-service teachers’ professional learning and education in regard to digital technologies. Teachers need opportunities and support to reflect on their everyday digital literacy practices and digital mindsets and to consider critically the implications for teaching new literacies.