Calls for Papers
Find here non-event related calls for papers, such as special issue journals.
Last updated 07/14/2014 by Kathryn de Ridder-Vignone.
Deadline: October 15 2014
Updated: July 01 2014
Many users of the Internet are aware of the existence of bots: automated programs that work behind the scenes to come up with search suggestions, check the weather, filter emails, or clean up Wikipedia entries. More recently, a new form of software robot has been making its presence felt in social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter – the socialbot. Unlike more familiar bots, socialbots are built to appear human. While a weatherbot will tell you if it's sunny and a spambot will incessantly peddle Viagra, socialbots will ask you questions, have conversations, like your posts, retweet you, and become your friend. All the while, if they're well-programmed, you won't know that you're tweeting and friending with a robot. Socialbot makers have suggested or demonstrated many uses for these 'bots, including exposing security flaws in Facebook, healing social rifts, bringing brands to life, quelling dissent on the behalf of governments, creating the appearance of popular support for politicians, infiltrating activist networks, or correcting misinformation circulating online. Socialbots can automate friending, liking, and tweeting, playing the odds to gain followers. They are built out of datasets produced by social media users and thus reflect our social media use back to us. They exploit our penchant for "hot" profiles, the triadic closure principle, and our need to make an impression and to get feedback. But they also give us a neutral sounding board, a means to pass the day, and a new form of friendship. As a cutting-edge cognitive computing or artificial intelligence technology, socialbots are only the latest in a long line of mechanical and software-based creations that humans live, talk, work, love, and struggle with.
There are many examples of these emotionally and cognitively complex machines in both history and popular culture.From the Mechanical Turk to the Turing Test to ELIZA to Cleverbot, from robotic factory workers to emotionally-attuned customer service telephone systems, from Rossum's Universal Robots to Robby to HAL to Colossus to Data, These developments present us with a wide range of philosophical, ethical, political, and economic quandaries. Who benefits from the use of robots? Who loses? Does a robot deserve rights? Who pulls the strings of these 'bots? Who has the right to know what about them? What does it mean to be intelligent? What does it mean to be a friend? Can research be done to create these bots but still uphold the ideal of informed consent? As a way to explore these questions – and many others – we seek chapter proposals for an edited book. Potential topics could be: Socialbots and artificial intelligence Genealogies of bots on the Internet Socialbots and big data Utopian and dystopian socialbot futures Uses of socialbots Socialbots and politics Socialbots and marketing Socialbots and posthumanism Human/machine relations Political economy of socialbots Sociable bots in popular culture Ways to program socialbots What socialbots tell us about social media Socialbots and human sociality Socialbots and anonymity Socialbots and identity politics Socialbots versus spambots We encourage proposals from people working in a wide range of fields, including communication, humanities, social sciences, computer science, software engineering, software studies, science and technology studies, philosophy, marketing, and media and cultural studies. We want accessible, well-researched chapters that not only inform others about these 'bots, but also establish socialbots as a new object of inquiry from many perspectives. We are currently talking with several academic publishers about this edited collection.
Special Issue Announcement: KNOWLEDGE INFRASTRUCTURES
Deadline: October 19 2014
Updated: April 23 2014
Science & Technology Studies Guest Editors Helena Karasti, Florence Millerand, Christine M. Hine, Geoffrey C. Bowker
In recent decades we have witnessed important changes in research and knowledge production. Whether these changes are promoted as a transformative force enabling new forms of investigation or perceived as buttressing existing forms of research, they are associated with developments in information technologies and infrastructures. These developments aim to pull people together, supporting distributed collaboration or facilitating new joint activities and endeavors across domains, fields, institutions, and geographies. They offer new opportunities for the sharing and connecting of information and resources – data, code, publications, computing power, laboratories, instruments, and major equipment. They often bring together a diversity of actors, organizations and perspectives from, for instance, academia, industry, business, and general public. The social, material, technical, and political relations of research and knowledge production are changing through digitalization of data, communication and collaboration, virtualization of research communities and networks, and infrastructuring of underlying systems, structures and services. These emerging phenomena participate in ongoing transitions in the scholarly arena, and in society in general: traditional ways of doing research may be challenged and knowledge production may become more distributed and broader in participants.
These phenomena have been cast under several labels such as big science, data-driven science, networked science, open science, Digital Humanities, and science 2.0. Other terms used are: e-Science, e-Social Science, e-Research, e-Infrastructure, and cyberinfrastructure. The aim of this first special issue on the topic of knowledge infrastructures in an STS journal is to take stock of existing research and chart new directions. For taking stock our scope is inclusive. We are open to investigations of knowledge infrastructures of all disciplines and research fields, from all theoretical and methodological perspectives, from all geographical locations. We also solicit studies of knowledge infrastructures that are not limited to scholarly knowledge production, but address, for instance citizen science, ‘hacker science’, as well as studies that address emerging forms of knowledge production, for instance open science and research 2.0, or studies that explore knowledge infrastructures in commercial or public services domains. To be able to chart new directions we encourage papers that clearly focus on knowledge infrastructures and contribute to furthering our understanding of infrastructures for research and knowledge production.
This special issue seeks articles that help the STS field to understand complex issues involved with knowledge infrastructures for research and knowledge production. We encourage empirical, conceptual, theoretical, and methodological contributions. Further information available see website.
Special issue of Cultural Studies of Science Education
Deadline: April 01 2014
Updated: March 11 2014
A general description of the focus of this Special Issues is: Many social theorists have noted that there are changes in the way that government has been organized, power exercised, and the public arena managed since the 1970s. These changes include—and here we are drawing upon the scholarship of Foucault (2008), Lemke (2011), and Cooper (2008):
an increased focus on the way that human populations are identified, managed, and neglected as part of the economic counter-revolution known as neoliberalism (the free market ideology which has achieved world wide dominance); concurrently, the importance of genomics, proteonomics, and other emergent fields of the technosciences in establishing the quality and nature of living, from genetically modified organisms to pharmaceutical controls over social being (e.g., in ADHD and cancer and heart attack risk management medications), from ecological controls to prosthetics and cyborg embodiments, emerging identities, subjectivities and performativities (i.e., ways of acting in public), such as the perpetual entrepreneurialism and life-long learning demanded by these new systems of institutional and societal management.
Together these changes are often labeled biopolitics, because life, especially its quality, management, and definition, is so central to these changes.
We are seeking contributions from scholars interested in these shifts, including (but not limited to) examinations of how biopolitics is shaping science education; how science education more broadly is responding or resisting biopolitics, and how science education curricula are coming to mirror biopolitical priorities. References
Cooper, M. (2008). Life as surplus: Biotechnology and capitalism in the neoliberal era. Seattle: University of Washington Press. Foucault, M., Senellart, M., & Collège de France. (2008). The birth of biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-79. Basingstoke England ; New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Lemke, T. (2011). Biopolitics: An advanced introduction. New York: New York University Press.
Designing Things Together: Intersections of Co-Design and Actor-Network Theory
Deadline: March 17 2014
Updated: February 15 2014
Special Issue of *CoDesign - International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts*
Guest editors: Cristiano Storni, Dagny Stuedahl, Thomas Binder and Per Linde.
In this call, we acknowledge the emergence of an interesting space at the intersection of co-design and Actor-Network Theory (ANT), especially as design research is confronted with increasingly complex issues such as sustainability, social responsibility, inclusion and democracy; and new approaches such as design activism, design participation, and social and participatory innovation. The influence of Science and Technology Studies (STS) on design research has a long history and it is still enjoying a great deal of attention (Hanset et al, 2004; Ingram et al, 2007; Woodhouse and Patton, 2004). Through the establishment of pioneering work in various disciplines such as architecture (Yaneva, 2008), participatory design (Ehn, 2008), human-computer interaction (DiSalvo, 2012), user-centred design (Steen, 2012), critical design (Ward and WIlkie, 2010) some design scholars have already started to explore this 'coming together' of theoretical thinking and design practices where different traditions, approaches and people meet. The interest is mutual and while some STS scholars have started to appreciate design as a key concern (Latour, 2008a,b, 2013; Yaneva, 2009; Storni, 2012), the more activist wing of STS are looking at design to extend and re-think the impact of social research (Woodhouse et al, 2002; Venturini, 2010).
As technology is becoming ubiquitous and pervasive, and design is increasingly recognized as a driving force for social change, approaches that draw on both STS (conceptually equipped to deal with socio-techno-scientific issues), and design (methodologically equipped to intervene in such issues) are of increasing importance. In this context, we are interested in exploring, mapping and more systematically investigating approaches emerging from exchanges in which ANT (as well as related STS approaches such as post-phenomenology, feminist and post-colonial studies) and co-design become mutually relevant. Indeed, participatory and collaborative design has a long tradition of focusing on the politics of design, the methods, tools and techniques used for democratic design, and the nature of participation (Kensing and Blomberg, 1998). These concerns seem to be shared by recent developments in ANT (e.g. Latour, 2004, 2008a,b) to further affirm that this emerging area is worth exploring and mapping. In this call, we aim to create an opportunity for exchange and reflection on the interesting intersections between ANT and co-design. We seek theoretical discussions as well as empirical case studies carried out using methodologies underpinning the ANT approach.
We seek reflections, connections and mutual influences; we seek new questions, a forward-looking attitude and constructive critical analysis. Specific topics may include but are not limited to: *ANT as a conceptual framework for participatory design and co-design* - ANT and material-semiotic/relational perspectives on design; - Design, *dasein*, (post-)phenomenology and ANT; - ANT to unpack the relationship and mutual shaping between design, technology and society; - ANT to rethink the design/use divide: design, meta-design, and appropriation; - How to use ANT as a pedagogical tool with design students; *ANT as a descriptive tool for co-design* - ANT as a descriptive tool supporting social investigation, design research and design processes; - ANT to re-think traditional notion of design and participation; - ANT to re-think (participatory and collaborative) design methods; - Design as translation/composition/instauration: implications for design and the design of designs; - ANT to rethink the ontological status of the design object/subject; *ANT and design for democracy and participation in techno-science* - ANT and design as a social experiment, design to make things public, design (for) public participation, design as mode of (co)existence; - ANT and critical design, design for debate; - ANT, '*cautious Prometheus'* and the issue of re-presentation: the role of design in the Ding-politik; - Design, care and matters of concern; - Mapping controversies, mapping participations, mapping design processes: implications for co-design;
Science Communication Ethics: State of the Art
Deadline: October 15 2014
Updated: December 03 2013
We live in a world highly dependent on science and technology, one that has been substantially modified by their application. As a result, communicating about science and understanding the complex relationship between science and society has gained ever-increasing importance. Yet, too often the focus of this research has been on the effectiveness of communicating science to non-experts, such as how to increase the understanding or acceptance of science. What have remained overlooked are the ethical considerations underlying this communication process. How ought science be communicated to non-expert audiences? What are the obligations of scientists and science communicators? What normative principles or standards should be respected in this sphere?
These questions were raised at the third Iowa State University Summer Symposium on Science Communication in the summer of 2013. In the course of organizing and conducting this event, it became increasingly clear that while scholarship on these overlooked ethical issues is growing, it remains scattered and on the periphery of science communication scholarship. As a result, the decision was made to pursue the creation of a theoretically informed collected volume on science communication ethics as a means to extend and share this work with audiences in science communication studies, science communication practice, science and technology studies, and the broader scientific and science policy communities.
The collected volume we plan will be open to scholars in all disciplines (as well as interested practitioners) who are able to connect their analyses to broader issues of theory in considering problems such as these:
• What are the underlying goals of science communication?
• What are the boundaries of appropriate advocacy and promotion?
• When are appeals to emotion ethical?
• When everyone can be a (science) journalist, does anything go?
• What ethical obligations do scientists have to communicate to broader publics?
• What ethical requirements should govern discussions of risks, benefits, “facts,” and uncertainties?
• How can public engagement be encouraged, and are some forms more valuable than others?
• What is the role of the political process in the management of science and technology?
• How can empirical work on the perceptions of ethics and related issues among various stakeholders and on effective teaching strategies for ethics contribute to clarity in this domain?
We invite contributions of 5000-7000 words that consider one of these or any other issue in the ethics of science communication and that are explicitly informed by some aspect of theory taken from the social sciences or humanities. The submission of ideas or extended abstracts to any of the editors for comment well prior to this deadline is strongly encouraged.
The fourth ISU Summer Symposium (29-31 May, 2014) is also open for scholars to receive feedback on early versions of work that might be considered for this collection. For information on this summer’s event, see http://scicomm.las.iastate.edu/summer-symposia/2014-summer-symposium/
Special Issue “Methods of Innovation Research” in HSR (“Historical Social Research / Historische Soz
Deadline: November 30 2013
Updated: October 06 2013
The special issue "Methods of Innovation Research" aims at exploring a broader set of research methods and theory-method-bundles for approaching processes of innovation in social sciences. Papers should address one of the questions below either at a more general methodological level or using a concrete example in a specific research project: \
Which qualitative and/or quantitative methods are best suited for which kind of theoretical problems in innovation research? Are there new ways of linking theory and methods? What methodological innovations concerning innovation-research can be observed? How can we use the whole set of traditional social science methods or how can they be adjusted to address problems in innovation research? Which types of comparison can help us to grasp processes of innovation more adequately? Which sampling strategies are appropriate for grasping processes of innovation? What are the specific data requirements for analysis of innovation and how can these data be collected? Which strategies of data analysis are appropriate? Which techniques of case-selection are appropriate? How can we combine different forms of data or data-analysis to gain new insights in innovation- research?
We especially welcome contributions beyond the narrow aisle between thick ethnographic descriptions of activities in labs or indicator-based observations of whole regions or nations dominant in innovation research today. Researchers can ask how we can grasp the special, highly complex processes of invention and diffusion of new symbolic or material artefacts methodologically or which combination of theories and methods are appropriate for such an endeavour.
It is listed in the most important data bases, such as SocINDEX with FULL TEXT (EBSCO), Social Science Citation Index (Thomson Reuters), SCOPUS (Elsevier), Sociological Abstracts (Cambridge Scientific Abstracts), Historical Abstracts (ABC- CLIO), International Political Science Abstracts (SAGE), Social Research Methodology Database (SAGE / NIWI) and Social Science Literature Information System (GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences). 2013. The abstract 2013 – submission of abstracts with paper proposals 2014 – notification of acceptance of paper proposals for the Special Issue in HSR 2014 – submission of first draft of full paper – October 18th 2014 – submission of the final version of the paper 2014 – Author Conference (voluntary, there will be travel allowances
The ESRC Genomics Network - Genetics and Society Book Series
Deadline: June 01 2015
Updated: April 14 2011
The ESRC Genomics Network - Genetics and Society Book Series provides an outlet for outstanding scholarship in the multiple fields of genetics and genomics social sciences research. Published with Routledge since 2006, the research monographs, handbooks, textbooks, and edited collections offer authoritative, cutting edge perspectives on issues covering the ethical, legal, social, economic or political aspects of:
* tissue engineering, enhancement, and cloning * genetic modification of foodstuffs and other organisms, * neuroscience and neuroethics * genetic screening and testing * stem cell research and reproductive technologies * psycho-social aspects of medical genetics and gene therapy * the social and ethical issues surrounding biomedical innovation * public engagement and political discourse * representations of genetics across the media and cultural spheres * regulatory policy and governance of biomedical research and its human applications * the sociology and anthropology of bio-science and bio-technology * bioethics * the economics of new biomedical technologies and their place in the ‘knowledge economy’
Proposals for new titles within the scope of these topic areas are encouraged from individuals and groups. Please see the book proposal submission guidelines and application form.
Further information, requests and queries contact:
Helen Greenslade, Editorial Manager Cesagen Cardiff University 6 Museum Place Cardiff CF10 3BG
Asian Biotechnology and Development Review (ABDR): Call for Articles, Reviewers
Updated: May 16 2010
The Asian Biotechnology and Development Review (ABDR) is a peer reviewed journal published by Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS) from New Delhi, India. It is supported by Life Science Division of UNESCO and Department of Biotechnology of Government of India. This Journal is abstracted in CAB Abstracts. ABDR is guided by an Editorial Board and Editorial Advisory Board with distinguished experts, policy makers, academics, representatives of UN organizations as members.
ABDR is now into its 12th Volume ABDR has been a forum for informed views and perspectives on biotechnology and development issues. The contents of past issues except the last two issues can be downloaded from RIS website. ABDR is listed under journals in the publications section in the RIS website http://www.ris.org.in
ABDR has published articles on a wide variety of issues ranging from Access and Benefit Sharing to Bioethics in Asia, from regulation of stem cells to biosafety and international trade, from Bt. cotton in India to regulating biotechnology in Australia. ABDR has published Special Issues also focusing on a particular theme.
Besides articles ABDR publishes Book Reviews. Articles that provide a perspective on an issue or analyze an important case (e.g. Decision by WTO Panel/Appellate Body) can be considered for publication.
The guidelines for contributors are available in the website. When an article is submitted it is immediately acknowledged and the review process is set in motion. We strive to publish the accepted articles as early as possible. ABDR welcomes articles, book reviews and other contributions. ABDR does not publish articles that are solely of scientific or technical in nature. The readership of ABDR is spread across the globe. While the contents of the past issues will give an idea about the nature and scope of the articles and book reviews published in ABDR, articles on themes and topics not covered before particularly articles on socio-economic impacts of emerging biotechnologies and developments in life sciences, and bioeconomy will be considered for publication. The scope of the contributions to ABDR need not be restricted to biotechnology related issues in Asia or developing countries.
ABDR is also interested in empanelling reviewers for doing peer-review of articles. Those interested in doing peer review are requested to submit a brief CV and their areas of specialization/expertise. Submissions can be sent by email to the Managing Editor and there is no need to send the same in CD/hard copy if submission is by email.
The Construction of Personal Identities Online: a Special Issue of Minds and Machines
Deadline: December 15 2011
Updated: January 15 2010
Information and communication technologies (ICTs) are building a new habitat (infosphere) in which future generations will spend an increasing amount of time. So, how individuals construct, shape and maintain their personal identities online (PIOs) is a problem of growing and pressing importance. Today, PIOs can be created and developed, as an ongoing work-in-progress, to provide experiential enrichment, expand, improve or even help to repair relationships with others and with the world, or enable imaginative projections (the "being in someone else's shoes" experience), thus fostering tolerance. However, PIOs can also be mis-constructed, stolen, "abused", or lead to psychologically or morally unhealthy lives, causing a loss of engagement with the actual world and real people.
The construction of PIOs affects how individuals understand themselves and the groups, societies and cultures to which they belong, both online and offline. PIOs increasingly contribute to individuals' self-esteem, influence their life-styles, and affect their values, moral behaviours, and ethical expectations. It is a phenomenon with enormous practical implications, and yet, crucially, individuals as well as groups seem to lack a clear, conceptual understanding of who they are in the infosphere and what it means to be a responsible informational agent online. This special issue of Minds and Machines seeks to fill this important gap in our philosophical understanding. It will build on the current debate on PIO, and address questions such as:
- How does one go about constructing, developing and preserving a PIO? Who am I online?
- How do I, as well as other people, define and re-identify myself online?
- What is it like to be that particular me (instead of you, or another me with a different PIO), in a virtual environment?
- Should one care about what happens to one's own PIO and how one (with his/her PIO) is perceived to behave online?
- How do PIs online and offline feedback on each other?
- Do customisable, reproducible and disposable PIOs affect our understanding of our PI offline?
- How are we to interpret cases of multiple PIOs, or cases in which someone's PIO may become more important than, or even incompatible with, his or her PI offline?
The special issue is part of a series of workshops organised in connection with the AHRC-funded project The Construction of Personal Identities Online. Authors may also wish to submit their papers to one of the workshops organized on the same topic. Submissions will also be considered for publication in the special issue.
The Body in Breast Cancer: a Special Issue of Social Semiotics
Deadline: October 01 2010
Updated: January 15 2010
Social Semiotics invites submissions to a special issue “The Body in Breast Cancer” in order to mobilize new critical interventions into the materiality of breast cancer.
The body, at the level of the breast, is the terrain on and through which breast cancer registers. This body, as understood through poststructuralist theory, is always already constructed and negotiated in relation to technology. This body, then, is a technologized body. The experience of breast cancer at once compels particular interfaces of body and machine in detection, treatment, and “recovery,” and the necessity for corporeal reworking in relation to the machine. Stressing the material breast as a technologized terrain necessitates grappling with the myriad of troubled relations of/to the breast, such as the prosthetic breast, the absent breast, fear of the lost breast, refusal of the breast, the scrutinized fleshy breast. In order to enable such exploration, we solicit papers in the fields of science and technology studies, queer studies, cultural studies, performance studies, and disability studies that enter into dialogue with scholarship on (bio)technologies and/or the posthuman. Foregrounding the technologized materiality in breast cancer will yield new ways of understanding subjectivity and somatic resistance, crafting corporeality, and practicing critique/politics in order to extend “livable lives.”
We are especially interested in accounts of queer, non-white, crip, male, classed bodies, and other particularities of subjecthood, that explore the practices of the technologized body in breast cancer at the level of machine and science, and imagined through biotech, the cyborg, cybernetics, prostheses, biometrics, and so forth.
We welcome articles that investigate:
• Excavations of the breast that foreground the policing, containment, mutilation, resignification, and crafting of the breast
• Bodies in breast cancer surveillance
• Bodies and breast reconstruction
• Bodies in treatment (radiation, the chemotherapy ward, detection, ultrasound, MRI, biopsy, mammogram, the breast clinic)
• Bodies and traces of military technologies; marks of cancer treatment
• Body-erotics/sexuality and breast cancer
• Visual economies of the breast and legalities of breastlessness
• The body and prognosis in breast cancer
• Altered notions of bodily capacity in relation to breast cancer
• Breasted aesthetics as self-crafting/disciplining
• Renegotiations of subjectivity at the interface with machines
• Unstable assemblages between flesh and machine in detection, risk assessment, prognosis
• Cancer and matter
• Regeneration and illness
General Call for Papers: East Asian Science, Technology and Society: an International Journal
Updated: January 13 2010
Daiwie Fu, National Yang Ming University, Taiwan
Warwick Anderson, University of Sydney, Australia / University of Wisconsin-Madison, US
Pingyi Chu, Academic Sinica, Taiwan
Sungook Hong, Seoul National University, South Korea
Togo Tsukahara, Kobe University, Japan
EASTS is an interdisciplinary quarterly journal based in Taiwan guided by editorial boards of STS scholars from Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and the West. Founded in 2007, EASTS provides an international platform for STS scholarship on East Asia. The goal of the journal is to bring Western and East-Asian STS communities together to share ideas, knowledge and research on the full range of topics encompassed by STS. EASTS promotes STS studies from and to the East Asian and worldwide STS communities.
Submit Your Paper Now!
Papers should be submitted via Editorial Manager: http://www.editorialmanager.com/east
Recent Special Issues:
Constructing Intimacy: Technology, Family and Gender in East Asia
Guest Editor: Francesca Bray
Gender and Reproductive Technologies in East Asia
Guest Editors: Adele E. Clarke, Azumi Tsuge and Chia-Ling Wu
The Globalisation of Chinese Medicine and Meditation Practices
Guest Editor: Elisabeth Hsu
Emergent Studies of Science and Technology in Southeast Asia
Call for Chapters Lecture Notes in Social Networks
September 30 2014 |
Updated: July 14 2014
Special Topic From Problem Framing to Problem Solving: Applications of Systems Thinking and Soft Operations
Research in managing complexity (An edited book - to be published by Springer in 2015)
Today we find ourselves confronted with problems of dynamic complexity and interdependency. Such ‘wicked problems’ and messes are seemingly intractable and are characterized as value-laden, ambiguous, and unstable, and thereby resist being tamed by classical problem solving. Actions and interventions associated with this complex problem space can have highly unpredictable and unintended consequences. Examples of such complex problems include health care reform, global climate change, transnational serious and organized crime, terrorism, homeland security, human security, disaster management, and humanitarian aid. Moving towards the development of solutions to these complex problem spaces depends on the lens we use to examine them and how we frame the problem. Systems Thinking and Soft Operations Research has had great success in contributing to the management of complexity. This book captures current trends and developments in the field of systems thinking and soft operations research.
Topics This book entitled: ‘From Problem Framing to Problem Solving: Applications of Systems Thinking and Soft OR in managing complexity’ will discuss relevant theoretical frameworks and applications of systems thinking and soft OR in various domains. Recommended topic areas include, but are not limited to: Soft OR/ Hard OR synergies Systems thinking System Dynamics/ Agent Based Models Management Science Visual analytics Modeling and Simulation Human Security Humanitarian Aid/ Disaster Relief Defence Security Safety Health Care Climate Change Disaster Management Important dates Abstract (Proposal) Submission Deadline: 30 September 2014 Notification of Proposal Acceptance: 15 October 2014 Full Chapter Submission deadline: 15 Feb 2015 Notification of Full Chapter Acceptance: 28 Feb 2015 Revised Chapter Submission Deadline: 30 March 2015 Final Submission to Publishers: 15 April 2015