Google Video Research Articles

The Undertheorized Environment: Sociological Insights for Behavioral Genetics

Dr. Andrew Perrin discussed the ontological claims and social theory which run beneath ideas of genetic causation of behavioral traits. He outlined five criteria for evaluating and conceptualizing the environment within genetic studies. He concluded by emphasizing complexity and describing gene-environment interaction chains. To watch Dr. Perrin’s presentation, please see the Panel 2 “Google Video posting.”:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8804321603731619003&hl=en

History and Philosophy of Gene Environment Interaction

AbstractDr. Kenneth Schaffner gave a brief introduction to the symposium topics. He began with a history of the thinking on gene-environment interactions and described the ensuing controversies. He cited the lack of a consensus theory of the environment and then described some methodological and technological advances in the studies of gene-environment interactions.To watch Dr. Schaffner’s presentation, please see the Panel 1 "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3097337289947323438&hl=en

Gene-Environment Interaction: Definitions and Study Designs

AbstractDr. Ruth Ottman first discussed different models of gene-environment interactions and then delved into designs of studies attempting to elucidate such interactions. She stressed the importance of using the correct measurement scale, whether additive or multiplicative, noting that the additive measurement scale is more consistent with biological models. Dr. Ottman concluded by reminding the audience of the need for very large sample sizes, and thus collaboration, in gene-environment interaction studies. To watch Dr. Ottman’s presentation, please see the Panel 2 "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8804321603731619003&hl=en

History and Philosophy of Gene Environment Interaction

Dr. Kenneth Schaffner gave a brief introduction to the symposium topics. He began with a history of the thinking on gene-environment interactions and described the ensuing controversies. He cited the lack of a consensus theory of the environment and then described some methodological and technological advances in the studies of gene-environment interactions.To watch Dr. Schaffner’s presentation, please see the Panel 1 "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3097337289947323438&hl=en

Behavioral and Psychiatric Genetics: Learning from History

AbstractBehavioral and Psychiatric Genetics (BPG) offers great promise for clarifying the causes of both normal behaviors as well as psychiatric disorders, and in the latter case serving as a more rational basis for treatments. But the field has also generated serious social concerns about individual and ethnic stereotyping of intelligence and violent behaviors. This short talk identifies some of these themes from the 1970s, 80s, and 90s, and reviews recent shifts about the directions BPG is taking in the first decade of the twenty-first century. I cover the collapse of simple molecular gene-behavior models in the 1990s, and the rise of gene-environment interaction paradigms, as well as the increasing role of neuroscience in BPG in the present decade. I close by citing molecular-studies that may require we revisit previous historical lessons, now in a molecular genetics-neuroscience context.To watch Dr. Schaffner’s presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2384504189343195854&hl=en

Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics: A Useful Distinction?

Dr. Hallmayer began with a discussion of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics' work on genetics, mental disorders and human behavior. He further explored psychiatric genetics and urged against the oversimplification of dynamic interactions. To watch Dr. Hallmayer’s presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5387564337084407366&hl=enTo watch the deliberative discussion concluding the first Symposium panel, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3871777823134971240&hl=en

Psychiatric Genetics: Methods, Findings and Ethical Issues

AbstractThis talk has 4 major sections. First, I review the basic definition of a complex trait, especially as it applies to psychiatric disorders. Second, I outline the 4 basic paradigms of psychiatric genetics: simple genetic epidemiology, advanced genetic epidemiology, gene-finding methods and molecular genetics. Third, I review a few basic facts about psychiatric genetics - the level of heritabilities found for most common disorders and the difficulties the field has had in obtaining replicated evidence for single gene effects. Finally, I briefly review three conceptual/philosophical issues that relate to psychiatric genetics: i) why do people become much more concerned in learning about possible genetic influences on personality or risk for depression than genes that influence risk for cancer, atherosclerosis or asthma? ii) how have the results of research in behavioral/Psychiatric Genetics impacted on the sense of Parental Responsibility for psychiatric illness in their offspring.To watch Dr. Kendler’s presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3261606556062804269&hl=en

Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics: A Useful Distinction?

AbstractDr. Hallmayer began with a discussion of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics' work on genetics, mental disorders and human behavior. He further explored psychiatric genetics and urged against the oversimplification of dynamic interactions. To watch Dr. Hallmayer’s presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5387564337084407366&hl=enTo watch the deliberative discussion concluding the first Symposium panel, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3871777823134971240&hl=en

Impact of Behavior Genetics on Medicine and Society

Understanding the role of genes in human behavior will impact both medicine and society, but not always in the manner expected. Knowledge about behavioral genes can be used for the good, for example by improving psychiatric diagnoses, developing new drugs to treat mental illnesses, and dispelling harmful myths about certain types of human variation. However, the same sort of information could be used to discriminate against people, to provide quick fixes for social problems, or to support eugenics. How we use the new knowledge about molecular behavior genetics will depend on the legal, ethical and social policies that we develop.To watch Dr. Hamer's presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9036771709057660539&hl=en To watch the deliberative discussion concluding the Symposium after this last presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4540711705005631053&hl=en

Behavioral Genetics and Equality

I will explore the implications of findings in behavioral genetics for two conceptions of equality: equality of opportunity and the equal moral worth of persons. New findings in behavioral genetics showing that behavioral traits, and the variance in behavioral traits, have some genetic underpinnings would not seem in themselves to threaten either of these notions of equality—we have long known that there is significant variation in these traits across persons and have assumed that some significant portion of that variation has genetic sources. I believe it is the uncertain and probably distant prospect of genetic interventions to enhance some behavioral traits, which could greatly increase the range and inequality of those traits in humans, that may seem to threaten these two notions of equality. I will argue that significant capacities to enhance behavioral traits could indeed threaten and erode equality of opportunity, but that it should not undermine the equal moral worth of persons.To watch my presentation, please see the "Google Video posting":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7235940965176250693&hl=en.

Phenotypes, Social Constructionism and the Spurious Finding

AbstractDr. Press discussed behavioral genetics through the lens of social constructionism. She also discussed the phenomenon of medicalization, focusing on the example of smoking as a behavior.To watch Dr. Press's presentation, please see the "Google Video posting":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=522910112497476586&hl=en.

Impact of Behavior Genetics on Medicine and Society

AbstractUnderstanding the role of genes in human behavior will impact both medicine and society, but not always in the manner expected. Knowledge about behavioral genes can be used for the good, for example by improving psychiatric diagnoses, developing new drugs to treat mental illnesses, and dispelling harmful myths about certain types of human variation. However, the same sort of information could be used to discriminate against people, to provide quick fixes for social problems, or to support eugenics. How we use the new knowledge about molecular behavior genetics will depend on the legal, ethical and social policies that we develop.To watch Dr. Hamer's presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9036771709057660539&hl=en To watch the deliberative discussion concluding the Symposium after this last presentation, please see the "Google Video posting.":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4540711705005631053&hl=en

Recent Use of Behavioral Genetics in Criminal Cases

AbstractHuman behavioral genetics research has been introduced in the U.S. criminal justice system, and its use will likely become more prevalent in the near future. This presentation will discusses the recent attempts by criminal defendants to introduce genetic predisposition testimony to negate the voluntariness of their conduct, to negate mens rea, to bolster an insanity defense or as mitigating evidence during sentencing. Although courts have thus far limited such testimony, the opinions in these cases demonstrate a likelihood that such evidence will play a larger role in future cases.To watch Professor Farahany's presentation, please see the "Google Video posting": http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=585209098810298267&hl=en.

Challenging or Reinforcing Social Prejudice?

AbstractBehavior genetics holds out the hope of unbiased study of the biological bases of human behavior. Without more rigorous reflection on behavioral concepts, however, behavior genetics will succeed only in reinforcing social biases. This point is illustrated with reference to studies on aggression, sexual orientation, and gender differences.To watch Professor Longino's presentation, please see the "Google Video posting":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3926548921438712173&hl=en.

Recent Use of Behavioral Genetics in Criminal Cases

Human behavioral genetics research has been introduced in the U.S. criminal justice system, and its use will likely become more prevalent in the near future. This presentation will discusses the recent attempts by criminal defendants to introduce genetic predisposition testimony to negate the voluntariness of their conduct, to negate mens rea, to bolster an insanity defense or as mitigating evidence during sentencing. Although courts have thus far limited such testimony, the opinions in these cases demonstrate a likelihood that such evidence will play a larger role in future cases.To watch Professor Farahany's presentation, please see the "Google Video posting": http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=585209098810298267&hl=en.

Behavioral Genetics and Equality

AbstractI will explore the implications of findings in behavioral genetics for two conceptions of equality: equality of opportunity and the equal moral worth of persons. New findings in behavioral genetics showing that behavioral traits, and the variance in behavioral traits, have some genetic underpinnings would not seem in themselves to threaten either of these notions of equality—we have long known that there is significant variation in these traits across persons and have assumed that some significant portion of that variation has genetic sources. I believe it is the uncertain and probably distant prospect of genetic interventions to enhance some behavioral traits, which could greatly increase the range and inequality of those traits in humans, that may seem to threaten these two notions of equality. I will argue that significant capacities to enhance behavioral traits could indeed threaten and erode equality of opportunity, but that it should not undermine the equal moral worth of persons.To watch my presentation, please see the "Google Video posting":http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7235940965176250693&hl=en.

Google Video–Just Another Video Sharing Site?

ABSTRACT Many have heard that Google bought YouTube, but did you know that it has another product called Google Video? Not only is Google Video out there, but several other sites are also in the video sharing game. This article focuses on the current sites offering video sharing, their services, their philosophy, and allowing readers to compare for themselves.

Waddling around the digital iceberg: Use of virtual spaces and environments by children, preteens, and teens

AbstractEmerging technologies, including Web 2.0, are offering new opportunities and possibilities for youth to create, organize, represent content, read and learn, exchange and share information, and to fulfill a need to communicate with others. MySpace, YouTube, Google Video, blogs, podcasts, del.icio.us, and Flickr offer seamless functionalities and capabilities that young users find fascinating. Virtual environments available for children, preteens, and teens are growing in popularity. Children of various ages are contributing to the Web not only by creating content, but also by tagging information to represent content.

Lecture video capture for the masses

Earlier work had shown the positive learning impact of the ability to review class lecture videos. Prior video capture systems used university provided infrastructure such as video technicians and post-production facilities. However, such capture is expensive; forcing schools to carefully choose the courses that can be video taped. We show that technology advances can allow every faculty member to make a modest effort and video tape their lectures, perform simple post processing and disseminate the contents either through their own web servers, using podcasts or via services such as Google video. Consumer grade HD cameras remove the need for accurate tracking of the faculty member and chalkboards; one stationary camera can frame the entire chalkboard. Desktop computers are powerful enough to perform the required multimedia operations. The faculty can also add pedantically useful annotations; a step that is unlikely to be performed by the video technicians. Many students own iPods, PSPs, laptops and other devices that allow them to watch the video at their convenience. We report on the tools used, the associated network cost and our experiences with video recording an undergraduate Operating Systems (Spring 2006). For the twelve month duration from Feb '06 - Feb '07, the OS course consumed over five days worth of our external network link bandwidth. The network cost in distributing all the lectures taught in our university can be prohibitive.

Moving Image Preservation and Cultural Capital

This article examines the changing landscape of moving image archiving in the wake of recent developments in online video sharing services such as YouTube and Google Video. The most crucial change to moving image archives may not be in regard to the collections themselves, but rather the social order that sustains cultural institutions in their role as the creators and sustainers of objectified cultural capital. In the future, moving image stewardship may no longer be the exclusive province of institutions such as archives and libraries, and may soon be accomplished in part through the work of other interested individuals and organizations as they contribute to and define collections. The technologies being built and tested in the current Internet environment offer a new model for the reimagined moving image archive, which foregrounds the user in the process of creating the archive and strongly encourages the appropriation of moving images for new works. This new archetype, which in theory functions on democratic principles, considers moving images—along with most other types of cultural heritage material—to be building blocks of creative acts or public speech acts. One might argue that the latter represents a new model for creating an archive; this new democratic archive documents and facilitates social discourse.