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 Unpublished manuscript, used with permission.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
Bölüm Derleme Makaleleri -Compilation Articles
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)
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)
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)