[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]
[Commlist] Call for Papers, Demos and Provocations for Games + Communication Ante-Conference
Thu Jan 10 06:45:22 GMT 2019
Games + Communication Ante-Conference (preceding ICA 2019)
/Call for Papers, Demos and Provocations/
*For the “Games + Communication Ante-Conference”*
*Friday, May 24, 2019 – Washington, DC*
/(Preceding the International Communication Association (ICA) annual
*WHEN: Papers due January 31; day long conference on Friday*,* May 24,
*LOCATION: Washington, DC at the **AU Game Lab
The *ICA Game Studies Division* and *American University (AU)* request
proposals for papers, unusual panels and demos for a one-day conference
in Washington, DC on the intersection of games, research in the field of
communication, policy, and innovative methods. The event will be hosted
in the new AU Game Lab and feature a reception afterward.
This is a deliberately intimate event. Registration will be capped at
50 people, with priority to speakers to reward participation – so
submit! Cost will be minimal, primarily for food and facilities, and
likely to be well under $100, depending on the sponsorships we obtain.
If your organization would like to be a sponsor, let us know.
*WHO SHOULD SUBMIT:* Game and communication scholars – but also
designers, DC game strategists and funders.
*BACKGROUND:* This is a new twist on traditional academic conferences,
with several unusual formats and some DC specialties including
government funding and policy implications for games research. Today,
the study of games influences design, shapes our understanding of
society, and is applied in domains from education to healthcare, museums
and urban planning. All are welcome. Emerging technologies, including
Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality, use game engines even when
applied to broader communicative purposes.
*OUR GOAL:* We are deliberately hosting an “Ante-Conference” to allow
for more provocative content than that usually encountered in
traditional academic venues. Therefore, we not only request traditional
research papers, but also solicit “ideas beyond research,” including
failures on which scholars can build, methods to link design principles
to theories, and workshops to probe genuinely difficult topics of game
research and design. Traditional scholarship is still welcome, but the
proposal should address take into account the unique themes and goals of
*DC NETWORKING IDEAS:* We also are looking for ideas on how the event
might best tap into Washington DC’s rich universe of federal funding
agencies, policymakers and design practitioners. Currently we are
considering inviting select representatives to a networking reception at
the end of the day, possibly with a keynote panel just beforehand. The
focus will be on how we should be improving the connection between
research and policy/funding/design. Ideas in this direction can be
submitted as an email inquiry or as a more formal panel (see below).
*OPTION A:* more traditional, including:
·*Research Reports* and *Theoretical Papers *submitted as *Extended
Abstracts *of *500 – 1200 words*. Each proposal should contain a (1)
brief description of the research gap and theoretical background, (2)
research questions, (3) methodological approach, (4) progress and
anticipated implications. Submissions are not required to provide full
results in cases of ongoing data collection, but presenters are expected
to present their findings at the conference. Make sure to give a sense
of your progress so far, and why you are likely to have something
provocative or useful by late spring. Traditional papers will be given
less priority than those clearly stating why they should be discussed
outside a traditional conference (e.g., thorny issues about how to frame
a particular finding may be more interesting than basic learning gains
from a game).
·*Panel Proposals *are to be submitted as *Extended Abstracts *of *500 –
1200 words*. Each panel proposal should consist of (1) abstract of the
core ideas the panel desires to address, (2) a rationale for the panel,
and (3) a brief overview of individual topics covered. Non-traditional
panels, or those relevant to the topics below are encouraged to apply.
Evidence of high-quality speaking/speakers is recommended.
*OPTION B:* innovative and provocative formats, especially as
alternatives to the traditional structures of academic conferences:
·*Hall of Meaningful Failure*: We invite studies from scholars that
should have worked – but didn’t. This format is meant to encourage
scholars to view their research as being iterative and building upon
itself, like a well-designed game. Or perhaps to warn of a pitfall that
more game scholars should be aware of and avoid at all costs. Send a
*500 – 1200 word *proposal of what you will discuss. Indicate if you
would like “no recordings” and for attendees to avoid public discussion
to make for a safer space for honest discussion.
·*Implications for Policy or Funding*: These *1000 – 1200 *word papers
translate a recent publication in games or related research into clear
recommendations (bullet points) for what policy makers should do
differently, based on the insights of the paper. The source paper should
not be your own, or your team’s work. Be as specific as possible about
the funding agency or policy unit that should respond.
·*University Studios*: What have university-led studios with external
clients or earned revenue models learned about making games, and how can
they improve? Grant-funded labs could also share findings, so long as
they can address how to balance the relationship with the funder in the
making and distribution process. Submit a *1000 – 1200 *word paper,
ideally comparing your studio or lab with at least one other institution
·*Methods that Break Play*: How is studying games different from other
fields of communication? Send a *500 – 1200 *word abstract. Do we need
to tweak any established methods in order to study games well?
·*Design Principles*: These *500 – 1200 *word abstracts will directly
address how game studies scholarship can affect design. Each principle
or “mini-theory” for design should be posited and defended, such as
“friends lists should be ranked by recency.” Such principles are needed
so that designers can act on research findings.
·*Playful Societies*: These *500 – 1200 word *abstracts reflect on how
playful practices are migrating out of games. This might include
activities like cheating or the subversion of norms and rules, as well
as how playful attitudes persist after the game is over. Papers can also
provide recommendations and ideas of how to bridge from games into other
domains and activities.
·*Well-Played-with-a-Theory*: We invite *500 *– *750* word proposals
that bring audiences through a bit of real game play, either commercial
or serious games, with a twist; the talks must highlight a key theory
that is becoming more prevalent in game studies. We also ask game
developers to submit under this heading utilizing gameplay from their
own games. Ideally you should be ready to bring whatever console or
adapters necessary to show live gameplay.
·*The Wrong Term*: What’s a word that game scholars should cease using,
or be using differently? Submit *250 – 500 *word abstracts for
presentations that will comprise “micro-talks” lasting no more than 10
minutes, followed by plenty of debate.
·*Demo**(showcase)*: *250-500* word abstract, including the current
status of the project and readiness of the demo. We plan to show demos
during the lunch hour or evening reception in a parallel format.
Priority will be given to games that are used to test a research idea or
apply a research finding in a novel way that advances our understanding
of the connection between research and practice.
*Hints, Selection Process and Curatorial Approach*
To maximize quality with such fluid and unusual categories, the chairs
will curate this event. Our goal is to make the day provocative and
satisfying as an experience, not necessarily to represent all categories
equally or in proportion to the number of submissions.
Our main advice is to craft proposals that you find personally
interesting and think your peers would find provocative with
implications for the field or future research.
We expect the tone of the conference to be reflective, with plenty of
time for questions and discussion. It will likely have one keynote
speaker, include an arcade that will showcase demonstration games (see
above), and a networking reception.****
*How to Submit*
·Please email all submissions and questions to Maxwell Foxman
((mfoxman /at/ uoregon.edu) <mailto:(mfoxman /at/ uoregon.edu)>).
·In the *title *of your *email *include the submission type under which
you are presenting. As an example: For someone submitting under the
“Well-Played Theory,” the subject line should read: *WELL-PLAYED THEORY:
[Title of Submission]*
·Submissions should include authors’ names, institutions and titles.
Where appropriate, submissions will be anonymized by the organizers
(i.e., you do not need to remove your name) and reviewed by a panel of
·Deadline for submissions: January 31, 2019 at 11:59pm EST.
·Notification of Acceptance: February 22, 2019. (Speakers are expected
to register within a week of their notification of acceptance so we can
finalize the public program.)
·Be notified! Email us if you would like to be notified when the
registration page goes up in February
*/Let’s up the ante for traditional conferences!/*
Chair: Maxwell Foxman, University of Oregon
Co-Chair: Benjamin Stokes, American University
Advisor: Rabindra Ratan, Michigan State University
This mailing list is a free service offered by Nico Carpentier. Please use it responsibly and wisely.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, please visit http://commlist.org/
Before sending a posting request, please always read the guidelines at http://commlist.org/
To contact the mailing list manager:
Email: (nico.carpentier /at/ vub.ac.be)
[Previous message][Next message][Back to index]