Current exhibitions, talks, workshops etc.
October 2 – 4, 2020
Diversity and Gender in Academia: Numbers and facts
(queer) feminist seminar format by and for doctoral scholarship holders of the Hans Böckler Foundation
Inequalities in higher education and science are a highly relevant topic. Although the number of women and other marginalized groups has increased in recent decades, the diversification process is relatively slow (Moss-Racusin et al., 2014). Equality is supported by wide circles. However, marginalized groups are underrepresented in proportion to their share in the general population. Universal knowledge is still understood as white (Sow, 2014). Numerous social science studies confirm historical and persistent gender and racist discrimination, which among other things, can be traced back to explicit and implicit prejudices against these groups (Shaw & Stanton, 2012). What are the causes of this and what can we do to make the higher education system fairer?
Novemver 27 – 29, 2020
It’s about time!
More post-disciplinarity somewhere between visual arts, aesthetics, psychology and open science
Kunst der Erfahrung: Die interdisziplinäre Forschungswerkstatt der Psychologie und der Künste [Art of experience: The interdisciplinary research workshop of psychology and the arts]
May 13 – 15, 2021
Open Science in art therapy research: Validating the rating instrument for two-dimensional pictorial works (RizbA) on contemporary visual art
Places, Spaces and Time – Shaping the European Art Therapy Landscape
1st EFAT Conference in Riga, Latvia
Digital technologies allow us to share information beyond place, space and time. Current research benefits from these possibilities when it comes to opening research. Open Science includes six principles (Open Data, Open Source, Open Methodology, Open Peer Review, Open Access and Open Educational Resources) and can take part in various points of time during the research process. By applying these, we can shape the future of art therapy research in and beyond Europe by making it more visible, accessible and replicable. The presentation introduces recent findings on the rating instrument for two-dimensional pictorial works (RizbA) and thereby illustrates benefits of Open Science.
The study validates the questionnaire on a representative sample of contemporary fine art, consisting of 318 images depicting works by artists from different cultural areas dated to the 21st century, which are drawn from a digital image database. In a randomized test-retest design the pictorial material was rated in an online study by 506 (T1) respectively 238 (T2) art experts using RizbA. Statistical quality criteria such as item difficulty, capacity of differentiation, test-retest reliability, and intraclass correlation were calculated. Principal component analysis (PCA) and indices of factor similarity were computed.
The overall test’s capacity of differentiation yields a partial eta-squared of .31 (T1) and .40 (T2). Test-retest reliability is .86. PCA reveals an eight-factors solution, which is largely consistent across both measurement points. Tucker’s coefficient of congruence ranges between |0.71| and |1.00|. Intraclass correlation coefficients are .86 (T1) and .73 (T2).
While previous studies indicate a generalizability of the questionnaire to amateurs’ works, these findings confirm its applicability to professional contemporary artworks as well. Although a conclusion on the factors structure cannot be drawn yet, results are very promising. As the first reliable quantitative tool for formal picture analysis, RizbA opens up new perspectives in documentation and art therapy research. Beyond that the study includes several principles of Open Science, such as Open data, Open methodology, Open source and Open access, and therefore functions as a vivid example for future-oriented research in art therapy.
The study was funded by the Open Science Fellows Program by Wikimedia Germany, Stifterverband and VolkswagenStiftung.
I am pleased to be a speaker at your event and look forward to your inquiry.
- Moss-Racusin, C. A., van der Toorn, J., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2014). Scientific Diversity Interventions. Science, 615–616. doi: 10.1126/science.1245936
- Shaw, A. K., & Stanton, D. E. (2012). Leaks in the pipeline: separating demographic inertia from ongoing gender differences in academia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 3736–3741. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.0822
- Sow, N. (2014). Schwarze Wissensproduktion als angeeignete Profilierungsressource und der systematische Ausschluss von Erfahrungswissen aus Kunst- und Kulturstudien. In Weißsein und Kunst: Neue postkoloniale Analysen. Kunst und Politik: Jahrbuch der Guernica-Gesellschaft (Vol. 17, p. ?). Retrieved from https://www.noahsow.de/academic-colonialism