BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Bağlantısal Eylemin Mantığı: Sayısal Medya ve Çekişmeci Siyasetin Kişiselleştirilmesi

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 83, 49 - 73, 01.12.2015

W. Lence Bennett Alexandra Segerberg Burak Özçetin

Kaynakça

  • Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C. ve Sabucedo, J. (2011). The political protest of the outraged in Spain: what’s new?. Unpublished manuscript, used with permission.
  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity, Polity, Cambridge.
  • Beck, U. ve Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized Individua- lism and its Social and Political Consequences, SAGE, London.
  • Benford, R. D. ve Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: an overview and an assessment, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 26, ss. 611–639.
  • Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Mar- kets and Freedom, Yale University Press, New Haven.
  • Bennett,W. L. (1998). The uncivic culture: communication, identity, and the rise of lifest- yle politics, Ithiel de Sola Pool Lecture, American Political Science Association, published içinde P.S.: Political Science and Politics, vol. 31 (December), ss. 41–61.
  • Bennett,W. L. (2003). Communicating global activism: strengths and vulnerabilities of networked politics, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 6, no. 2, ss. 143–168.
  • Bennett, W. L. (2005). Social movements beyond borders: organization, communication, and political capacity in two eras of transnational activism, içinde (Der.) D. della Porta ve S. Tarrow, Transnational Protest and Global Activism, ss.203-226, Row- man & Littlefield, Boulder, CO.
  • Bennett,W. L. ve Segerberg, A. (2011). Digitalmedia and the personalization of collec- tive action: social technology and the organization of protests against the global economic crisis, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 14, ss. 770–799.
  • Bennett, W. L. ve Segerberg, A. (Yayınlanacak) The Logic of Connective Action: Digi- tal Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Bennett,W. L., Lang, S. ve Segerberg, A. (2011). Digital media and the organization of transnational advocacy: legitimacy and public engagement in national and EU issue networks, paper presented at International Studies Association Conference, Montreal, Canada, 16–19 March 2011.
  • Bimber, B. ve Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections, Oxford University Press, New York.
  • Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. ve Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment, Communication Theory, vol. 15, ss. 389–413.
  • Bimber, B., Stohl, C. ve Flanagin, A. (2009). Technological change and the shifting na- ture of political organization, içinde (Der.) A. Chadwick ve P. Howard, Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics, ss.72-85, Routledge, London.
  • Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. ve Stohl, C. (2012). Collective Action in Organizations: Inte- raction and Engagement and Engagement in an Era of Technological Change, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Calderaro, A. (2011). New political struggles in the network society: the case of free and open source software (FOSS) Movement, paper presented at ECPR General Conference, Reykjavik, 25–27 August 2011.
  • Castells, M. (2000). The Network Society, 2.Baskı, Blackwell, Oxford.
  • Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity, Political Communication, vol. 24, no. 3, ss. 283–301.
  • Chadwick, A. (2011). The hybrid media system, paper presented at ECPR General Con- ference, Reykjavik, Iceland, 25–27 August 2011.
  • Chesters, G. ve Welsh, I. (2006). Complexity and Social Movements: Multitudes at the End of Chaos, Routledge, London.
  • Daily Show (2009). Tea partiers advise G20 protesters, Daily Show, 1 October, [On- line] Available at: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-1-2009/tea- partiers-advise-g20-protesters (6 October 2010).
  • Dawkins, R. (1989). The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Diani, M. (2011). The Cement of Civil Society: Civic Networks in Local Settings, Barce- lona, unpublished manuscript.
  • Earl, J. ve Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally Enabled Social Change: Online and Offline Activism in the Age of the Internet, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Foot, K. ve Schneider, S. (2006). Web Campaigning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  • Gitlin, T. (1980). The Whole World Is Watching: Mass Media in the Making & Unmaking of the New Left, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  • Gladwell, M. (2010). Small change: why the revolution will not be tweeted, The New Yorker, 4 October.
  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 78, ss. 1360 1380.
  • Howard, P. ve Hussain, M. (2011). The role of digital media, Journal of Democracy, vol. 22, no. 3, ss. 35–48.
  • Hunt, S., Benford, R. D. ve Snow, D. A. (1994). Identity fields: framing processes and the social construction of movement identities, içinde (Der.) E. Laran˜a, H. John- ston & J. R. Gusfield, New Social Movements: From Ideology to Identity, ss.185- 208, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
  • Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and Post-Modernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  • Juris, J. (2008). Networking Futures: The Movements against Corporate Globalization, Duke University Press, Durham, NC.
  • Keck, M. ve Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in Inter- national Politics, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Livingston, S. ve Asmolov, G. (2010). Networks and the future of foreign affairs repor- ting, Journalism Studies, vol. 11, no. 5, ss. 745–760.
  • Lupia, A. ve Sin, G. (2003). Which public goods are endangered? How evolving com- munication technologies affect “The Logic of Collective Action”, Public Choice, vol. 117, ss. 315–331.
  • McAdam, D. (1986). Recruitment to high-risk activism: The case of freedom summer, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 92, ss. 64–90.
  • McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D. ve Zald, M. N. (Der.) (1996). Introduction: opportunities, mobilizing structures, and framing processes – toward a synthetic, comparati- ve perspective on social movements, içinde Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Fra- mings, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • McAdam, D., Tarrow, S. ve Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of Contention, Cambridge Uni- versity Press, New York.
  • McCarthy, J. D. ve Zald, M. N. (1973). The Trend of Social Movements in America: Professionalization and Resource Mobilization, General Learning Press, Morris- town, NJ.
  • McCarthy, J. D. ve Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: a partial theory’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 82, no. 6, ss. 1212–1241.
  • McDonald, K. (2002). From solidarity to fluidarity: social movements beyond “collec- tive identity” – the case of globalization conflicts, Social Movement Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, ss. 109–128.
  • Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Micheletti, M. (2003). Political Virtue and Shopping, Palgrave, New York.
  • Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate the World, Allen Lane, London.
  • Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Gro- ups, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Polletta, F. (2002). Freedom Is an Endless meeting. Democracy in American Social Mo- vements, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  • della Porta, D. (2005). Multiple belongings, flexible identities and the construction of “another politics”: between the European social forum and the local social fora, içinde (Der.) D. della Porta ve S. Tarrow, Transnational Protest and Global Acti- vism, ss.175-202, Rowman & Littlefield, Boulder, CO.
  • della Porta, D. ve Diani, M. (2006). Social Movements: An Introduction , 2.baskı, Black- well, Malden, MA.
  • Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon & Schuster, New York.
  • Put People First (2009). [Online] Available at: http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk/ (6 July 2011).
  • Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution, Perseus Pub., Camb- ridge, MA.
  • Robinson, A. ve Tormey, S. (2005). Horizontals, Verticals and the Conflicting Logics of Transformative Politics, içinde (Der.) C. el-Ojeili ve P. Hayden, Confronting Globalization, ss. 208-226, Palgrave, London.
  • Routledge, P. ve Cumbers, A. (2009). Global Justice Networks: Geographies of Trans- national Solidarity, Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK.
  • rtve (2011), Mas de seis millones de Espanoles han participado en el movimiento 15M, 6 August, [Online] Available at: http://www.rtve.es/noticias/20110806/mas-seis- millones-espanoles-han-participado-movimiento-15m/452598.shtml (18 Sep- tember 2011).
  • Segerberg, A. ve Bennett, W. L. (2011). Social media and the organization of collective action: using Twitter to explore the ecologies of two climate change protests, The Communication Review, vol. 14, no. 3, ss. 197–215.
  • Shiftman, L. (2013). Memes In Digital Culture, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Snow, D. A. ve Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobi- lization, International Social Movement Research, vol. 1, ss. 197–217.
  • Snow, D. A., Rochford, B.Jr.,Worden, S. K. ve Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation, American Sociologi- cal Review, vol. 51, ss. 464–481.
  • Tarrow, S. (2011). Power in Movement: Social Movements in Contentious Politics , 3.baskı. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Tilly, C. (2004). Social Movements, 1768–2004, Paradigm, Boulder, CO.
  • Tilly, C. (2006). WUNC, içinde (Der.) J. T. Schnapp ve M. Tiews, Crowds, ss.289-306, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  • Vinocur, N. ve Barkin, N. (2009). G20 marches begin week of protests in Europe, Reu- ters. 28 March, [Online] Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/28/ us-g20-britain-march idUSTRE52R0TP20090328 (9 July 2011).
  • Weller, B. (2010). G20 protests in Seoul, Demotix, [Online] Available at: http://www. demotix.com/photo/504262/g20-protests-seoul (9 July 2011).

Yıl 2015, Cilt: 21 Sayı: 83, 49 - 73, 01.12.2015

W. Lence Bennett Alexandra Segerberg Burak Özçetin

Kaynakça

  • Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C. ve Sabucedo, J. (2011). The political protest of the outraged in Spain: what’s new?. Unpublished manuscript, used with permission.
  • Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity, Polity, Cambridge.
  • Beck, U. ve Beck-Gernsheim, E. (2002). Individualization: Institutionalized Individua- lism and its Social and Political Consequences, SAGE, London.
  • Benford, R. D. ve Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: an overview and an assessment, Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 26, ss. 611–639.
  • Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Mar- kets and Freedom, Yale University Press, New Haven.
  • Bennett,W. L. (1998). The uncivic culture: communication, identity, and the rise of lifest- yle politics, Ithiel de Sola Pool Lecture, American Political Science Association, published içinde P.S.: Political Science and Politics, vol. 31 (December), ss. 41–61.
  • Bennett,W. L. (2003). Communicating global activism: strengths and vulnerabilities of networked politics, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 6, no. 2, ss. 143–168.
  • Bennett, W. L. (2005). Social movements beyond borders: organization, communication, and political capacity in two eras of transnational activism, içinde (Der.) D. della Porta ve S. Tarrow, Transnational Protest and Global Activism, ss.203-226, Row- man & Littlefield, Boulder, CO.
  • Bennett,W. L. ve Segerberg, A. (2011). Digitalmedia and the personalization of collec- tive action: social technology and the organization of protests against the global economic crisis, Information, Communication & Society, vol. 14, ss. 770–799.
  • Bennett, W. L. ve Segerberg, A. (Yayınlanacak) The Logic of Connective Action: Digi- tal Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Bennett,W. L., Lang, S. ve Segerberg, A. (2011). Digital media and the organization of transnational advocacy: legitimacy and public engagement in national and EU issue networks, paper presented at International Studies Association Conference, Montreal, Canada, 16–19 March 2011.
  • Bimber, B. ve Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning Online: The Internet in U.S. Elections, Oxford University Press, New York.
  • Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. ve Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment, Communication Theory, vol. 15, ss. 389–413.
  • Bimber, B., Stohl, C. ve Flanagin, A. (2009). Technological change and the shifting na- ture of political organization, içinde (Der.) A. Chadwick ve P. Howard, Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics, ss.72-85, Routledge, London.
  • Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. ve Stohl, C. (2012). Collective Action in Organizations: Inte- raction and Engagement and Engagement in an Era of Technological Change, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Calderaro, A. (2011). New political struggles in the network society: the case of free and open source software (FOSS) Movement, paper presented at ECPR General Conference, Reykjavik, 25–27 August 2011.
  • Castells, M. (2000). The Network Society, 2.Baskı, Blackwell, Oxford.
  • Chadwick, A. (2007). Digital network repertoires and organizational hybridity, Political Communication, vol. 24, no. 3, ss. 283–301.
  • Chadwick, A. (2011). The hybrid media system, paper presented at ECPR General Con- ference, Reykjavik, Iceland, 25–27 August 2011.
  • Chesters, G. ve Welsh, I. (2006). Complexity and Social Movements: Multitudes at the End of Chaos, Routledge, London.
  • Daily Show (2009). Tea partiers advise G20 protesters, Daily Show, 1 October, [On- line] Available at: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-1-2009/tea- partiers-advise-g20-protesters (6 October 2010).
  • Dawkins, R. (1989). The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Diani, M. (2011). The Cement of Civil Society: Civic Networks in Local Settings, Barce- lona, unpublished manuscript.
  • Earl, J. ve Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally Enabled Social Change: Online and Offline Activism in the Age of the Internet, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Foot, K. ve Schneider, S. (2006). Web Campaigning, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and Self Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  • Gitlin, T. (1980). The Whole World Is Watching: Mass Media in the Making & Unmaking of the New Left, University of California Press, Berkeley.
  • Gladwell, M. (2010). Small change: why the revolution will not be tweeted, The New Yorker, 4 October.
  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 78, ss. 1360 1380.
  • Howard, P. ve Hussain, M. (2011). The role of digital media, Journal of Democracy, vol. 22, no. 3, ss. 35–48.
  • Hunt, S., Benford, R. D. ve Snow, D. A. (1994). Identity fields: framing processes and the social construction of movement identities, içinde (Der.) E. Laran˜a, H. John- ston & J. R. Gusfield, New Social Movements: From Ideology to Identity, ss.185- 208, Temple University Press, Philadelphia.
  • Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and Post-Modernization: Cultural, Economic and Political Change in 43 Societies, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  • Juris, J. (2008). Networking Futures: The Movements against Corporate Globalization, Duke University Press, Durham, NC.
  • Keck, M. ve Sikkink, K. (1998). Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in Inter- national Politics, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY.
  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Livingston, S. ve Asmolov, G. (2010). Networks and the future of foreign affairs repor- ting, Journalism Studies, vol. 11, no. 5, ss. 745–760.
  • Lupia, A. ve Sin, G. (2003). Which public goods are endangered? How evolving com- munication technologies affect “The Logic of Collective Action”, Public Choice, vol. 117, ss. 315–331.
  • McAdam, D. (1986). Recruitment to high-risk activism: The case of freedom summer, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 92, ss. 64–90.
  • McAdam, D., McCarthy, J. D. ve Zald, M. N. (Der.) (1996). Introduction: opportunities, mobilizing structures, and framing processes – toward a synthetic, comparati- ve perspective on social movements, içinde Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Fra- mings, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • McAdam, D., Tarrow, S. ve Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of Contention, Cambridge Uni- versity Press, New York.
  • McCarthy, J. D. ve Zald, M. N. (1973). The Trend of Social Movements in America: Professionalization and Resource Mobilization, General Learning Press, Morris- town, NJ.
  • McCarthy, J. D. ve Zald, M. N. (1977). Resource mobilization and social movements: a partial theory’, American Journal of Sociology, vol. 82, no. 6, ss. 1212–1241.
  • McDonald, K. (2002). From solidarity to fluidarity: social movements beyond “collec- tive identity” – the case of globalization conflicts, Social Movement Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, ss. 109–128.
  • Melucci, A. (1996). Challenging Codes: Collective Action in the Information Age, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Micheletti, M. (2003). Political Virtue and Shopping, Palgrave, New York.
  • Morozov, E. (2011). The Net Delusion: How Not to Liberate the World, Allen Lane, London.
  • Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Gro- ups, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Polletta, F. (2002). Freedom Is an Endless meeting. Democracy in American Social Mo- vements, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
  • della Porta, D. (2005). Multiple belongings, flexible identities and the construction of “another politics”: between the European social forum and the local social fora, içinde (Der.) D. della Porta ve S. Tarrow, Transnational Protest and Global Acti- vism, ss.175-202, Rowman & Littlefield, Boulder, CO.
  • della Porta, D. ve Diani, M. (2006). Social Movements: An Introduction , 2.baskı, Black- well, Malden, MA.
  • Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community, Simon & Schuster, New York.
  • Put People First (2009). [Online] Available at: http://www.putpeoplefirst.org.uk/ (6 July 2011).
  • Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution, Perseus Pub., Camb- ridge, MA.
  • Robinson, A. ve Tormey, S. (2005). Horizontals, Verticals and the Conflicting Logics of Transformative Politics, içinde (Der.) C. el-Ojeili ve P. Hayden, Confronting Globalization, ss. 208-226, Palgrave, London.
  • Routledge, P. ve Cumbers, A. (2009). Global Justice Networks: Geographies of Trans- national Solidarity, Manchester University Press, Manchester, UK.
  • rtve (2011), Mas de seis millones de Espanoles han participado en el movimiento 15M, 6 August, [Online] Available at: http://www.rtve.es/noticias/20110806/mas-seis- millones-espanoles-han-participado-movimiento-15m/452598.shtml (18 Sep- tember 2011).
  • Segerberg, A. ve Bennett, W. L. (2011). Social media and the organization of collective action: using Twitter to explore the ecologies of two climate change protests, The Communication Review, vol. 14, no. 3, ss. 197–215.
  • Shiftman, L. (2013). Memes In Digital Culture, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Snow, D. A. ve Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobi- lization, International Social Movement Research, vol. 1, ss. 197–217.
  • Snow, D. A., Rochford, B.Jr.,Worden, S. K. ve Benford, R. D. (1986). Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation, American Sociologi- cal Review, vol. 51, ss. 464–481.
  • Tarrow, S. (2011). Power in Movement: Social Movements in Contentious Politics , 3.baskı. Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Tilly, C. (2004). Social Movements, 1768–2004, Paradigm, Boulder, CO.
  • Tilly, C. (2006). WUNC, içinde (Der.) J. T. Schnapp ve M. Tiews, Crowds, ss.289-306, Stanford University Press, Stanford.
  • Vinocur, N. ve Barkin, N. (2009). G20 marches begin week of protests in Europe, Reu- ters. 28 March, [Online] Available at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/03/28/ us-g20-britain-march idUSTRE52R0TP20090328 (9 July 2011).
  • Weller, B. (2010). G20 protests in Seoul, Demotix, [Online] Available at: http://www. demotix.com/photo/504262/g20-protests-seoul (9 July 2011).
Toplam 65 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Diğer ID JA68KF79AH
Yazarlar

W. Lence Bennett Bu kişi benim

Alexandra Segerberg Bu kişi benim

Burak Özçetin Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Aralık 2015
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2015 Cilt: 21 Sayı: 83

Kaynak Göster

APA Bennett, W. L., Segerberg, A., & Özçetin, B. (2015). Bağlantısal Eylemin Mantığı: Sayısal Medya ve Çekişmeci Siyasetin Kişiselleştirilmesi. Folklor/Edebiyat, 21(83), 49-73.

Derginin yayım dili Türkçe ve İngilizce’dir, ayrıca Türkçe de olsa tüm basılan makalelerin başlık, öz ve anahtar sözcükleri İngilizce olarak da makalede bulunur. Hakemlerden onay almış Türkçe makaleler için 750-1000 sözcükten oluşan genişletilmiş özet (extended summary) gereklidir. Elektronik çeviriler kabul edilmez.
Dergi TR-Dizin, Web of Science (ESCI), DOAJ ile diğer pek çok dizin tarafından taranmaktadır. Scimagoe quartile değeri: Q2 'dir:

TR DIZIN 2020 Etik Kriterleri kapsamında, dergimize 2020 yılından itibaren etik kurul izni gerektiren çalışmalar için makalenin yöntem bölümünde ilgili Etik Kurul Onayı ile ilgili bilgilere (kurul-tarih-sayı) yer verilmesi gerekecektir. Bu nedenle dergimize makale gönderecek olan yazarlarımızın ilgili kriteri göz önünde bulundurarak makalelerini düzenlemeleri önemle rica olunur.

Alan Editörleri/ Field Editörs

Halkbilimi/Folklore
Prof.Dr. Hande Birkalan-Gedik (JohannWolfgang-Goethe İniversitet-birkalan-gedik@m.uni-frankfurt.de)
Prof.Dr. Ali Yakıcı (Gazi Üniversitesi-yakici@gazi.edu.tr)
Prof.Dr. Aynur Koçak (Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi-nurkocak@yildiz.edu.tr)
Prof.Dr. Işıl Altun (Regensburg Üniversitesi/Kocaeli Üniversitesi-İsil.Altun@zsk.uni-regensburg.de)

Doç.Dr. Ahmet Keskin (Samsun Üniversitesi-ahmet.keskin@samsun.edu.tr)

Edebiyat/Literature
Prof.Dr. Abdullah Uçman (Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi -emekli-29 MayısÜniversitesi-abdullahucman@29mayis.edu.tr
Prof. Dr. Ramazan Korkmaz (Ardahan Üniversitesi-emekli-Kafkasya Üniversiteler Birliği -KÜNİB-r_korkmaz@hotmail.com)
Prof.Dr. Emel Kefeli (Marmara Üniversitesi-emekli-İstanbul 29 Mayıs Üniversitesi-ayseemelkefeli @gmail.com)

Prof.Dr. Zekiye Antakyalıoğlu ( İstanbul Aydın Üniversitesi-zekabe@hotmail.com)
Antropoloji/Anthropology
Prof.Dr. Hanife Aliefendioğlu (Doğu Akdeniz Üniversitesi-hanife.aliefendioglu@emu.edu.tr)
Prof. Dr. Şebnem Pala Güzel (Başkent Üniversitesi-sebnempa@baskent.edu.tr)
Prof.Dr. Derya Atamtürk Duyar (İstanbul Üniversitesi-datamturk@istanbul.edu.tr)
Prof.Dr. Meryem Bulut (Ankara Üniversitesi-meryem.bulut@gmail.com)
Dil-Dilbilim/Language-Linguistics
Prof.Dr. Nurettin Demir (Hacettepe Üniversitesi-demir@hacettepe.edu.tr)
Prof. Dr. Aysu Erden (Maltepe Üniversitesi-aysuerden777@gmail.com)
Prof.Dr. Sema Aslan Demir (Hacettepe Üniversitesi-semaaslan@hacettepe.edu.tr)