umu.sePublications
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 18 of 18
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1. Almansa, Sánchez
    et al.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    ‘Public Archaeology from the ground up’ and the first meeting of the EAA Working Group in Public Archaeology.2013In: The European Archaeologist, Vol. 40, p. 21-22Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 2. Griffiths, Seren
    et al.
    Moshenska, Gabriel
    Bonacchi, Chiara
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    OK computer?: Digital community archaeologies in practice2015In: Internet Archaeology, ISSN 1363-5387, E-ISSN 1363-5387, Vol. 40Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 3.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    A Digital Public Archaeology?2013In: Papers from the Institute of Archaeology, ISSN 0965-9315, E-ISSN 2041-9015, Vol. 23, no 1Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Digital Public Archaeology is a very new label for a contemporary practice, and as such has been subject to a limited amount of theoretical scrutiny. The rapid pace of change within Internet technologies has significantly expanded potential for this ‘digital’ form of Public Archaeology practice. Internet technologies can be used to gather contributions of ‘crowd-sourced’ archaeological content; to share and discuss archaeological news and discoveries; foster online community identity, situated around the topic of archaeology and wider heritage issues, or to elicit financial support. Expectations of and opportunities for social, collaborative and individual participation and interaction with cultural heritage have grown accordingly. Professional archaeological organisations are increasingly encouraged, if not required, to disseminate their grey literature reports, publications, educational resources, data-sets, images and other archaeological informatics through digital means, frequently as mandatory outputs for impact assessment and public accountability. Real-time sharing, comment and feedback of archaeological information online and via mobile technologies stand in contrast to lengthy waits for publication and wider dissemination. This paper will explore the literature on the practice of Public Archaeology in the UK, and issues associated with the development of digital public engagement in the heritage sector.

  • 4.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology. Umeå University.
    Archaeology of Austerity: A Line Across London2017In: Livingmaps Review, ISSN 2398-0338, Vol. 3Article in journal (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Public Archeology 2015 was a twelve-month project led by archaeologists and non-archaeologists to create public engagement with archaeology

  • 5.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    Ethical challenges for communication with online publics2017In: Archaeological informatics ethics in practice / [ed] J. Wells, New York: Springer, 2017Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 6.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    I’ll give you ‘punk archaeology’, sunshine2017In: World archaeology, ISSN 0043-8243, E-ISSN 1470-1375, Vol. 49, no 3, p. 306-317Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article examines the ‘punk archaeology’ movement through the lens of the present economic circumstances of public archaeology in the United Kingdom. It will situate the DIY aesthetic of punk archaeology within the capitalist economy, and will discuss the variety of political and economic issues demanding critical examination which emerge from the punk aesthetic enjoyed by the protagonists of the movement. It will discuss the impact of surveillance and digital capitalism, prosumer commodification, using volunteer labour to replace paid professionals and overarching ethical considerations. It argues that, while the ambitions of the punk archaeology manifesto are laudable, too little critical thought has been applied to the claims it has made for revolution within the discipline of archaeology, and this article will instead make a case for a more considered approach to public archaeology practice.

  • 7.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    Issues with Using Social Media Data to Explore Communications in Archaeology.2014In: Social Media in Social Research: Blogs on Blurring the Boundaries. / [ed] Kandy Woodfield, NatCen Social Research , 2014Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 8.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    Microblogging and Online Community2015In: Internet Archaeology, ISSN 1363-5387, E-ISSN 1363-5387, Vol. 39Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The dominance of social media technologies on the Internet has located virtual communities around the use of proprietary social networking platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram, although the situation, location and definition of any online community are constantly evolving. Belonging to a number of these online communities, through social networking sites or forums is becoming a normal practice among Internet users. Yet much of the academic analysis of these online communities and networks takes place in isolation from the activities of the community itself in real life. This abstracts the community ties that people also hold offline with their online networks and does not consider the relationships and interactions that may also exist offline. This article will explore the experiences of archaeologists using the micro-blogging platform Twitter, and explore how the format and communication supported by Twitter creates a sense of community online and offline, and support professional and personal networking, using the concepts of weak ties and social capital.

  • 9.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    Online Survey Data from Twitter and Archaeology Surveys 2011-2013.2014In: Journal of Open Archaeology Data, E-ISSN 2049-1565 , Vol. 3:e3Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    These survey results are from annual online surveys of Twitter users who are active volunteers or professional archaeologists worldwide. The data covers a variety of topics related to location of Twitter use, the type of device used, lists and followers, activity relating to archaeological topics, public engagement and archaeological networking online. There is scope for sentiment analysis, and further qualitative and quantitative analysis.

  • 10.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    Research Associate, UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    Qualitative and Quantitative Data on the Use of the Internet for Archaeological Information2015In: Journal of Open Archaeological Data, ISSN 2049-1565, Vol. 3, no e5Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    These survey results are from an online survey of 577 UK-based archaeological volunteers, professional archaeologists and archaeological organisations. These data cover a variety of topics related to how and why people access the Internet for information about archaeology, including demographic information, activity relating to accessing information on archaeological topics, archaeological sharing and networking and the use of mobile phone apps and QR codes for public engagement. There is wide scope for further qualitative and quantitative analysis of these data.

  • 11.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    The Day of Archaeology: blogging and online archaeological communities. 2014In: European Journal of Post-Classical Archaeologies, Vol. 4, p. 421-446Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This article is a case study of the Day of Archaeology project, which discusses the benefits and disadvantages of creating an online public engagement project for public archaeology. It evaluates the effectiveness of the Day of Archaeology for the creation of an online archaeological community as a resource for archaeological education and public outreach, and identifies areas of best practice for the creation and management of digital public archaeology projects. Si presenta il caso studio del progetto “Day of Archaeology”, discutendo vantaggi e svantaggi della creazione di un progetto online per il coinvolgimento del pubblico. Si valuta l’efficacia del “Day of Archaeology” per la creazione di una community di archeologi online a fini educativi e di valorizzazione e si identificano i punti chiave per la creazione e la gestione dei progetti digitali di archeologia.

  • 12.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    The Future of Recording the Past: Web Archives as a Resource for Public Archaeology2015In: Journal of Contemporary Archaeology, ISSN 2051-3429, E-ISSN 2051-3437, Vol. 2, no 1, p. S28-S32Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The rapid and continual advancement of the internet as a platform for communication on archaeological topics has brought permanent changes to the methods through which we present information from the sector to the public. This article discusses the potential for an exploration of the UK web archives for information about the history of archaeology online, and a case study undertaken as part of a Big Data project at the British Library by the author. The article concludes that we have a significant issue for media archaeologists in the future; the lack of material evidence for these iterations means we risk losing an understanding of our social, economic, cultural, and technological histories and our perception of these developments over time. It suggests that further exploration of these archives from an archaeological perspective could be beneficial both as an investigation of the iterations of digital archaeology (the creation of a history of public engagement with the subject), and as a study of the use of archaeological techniques for archival research.

  • 13.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    Twitter & Archaeology: An Archaeological Network in 140 Characters or Less2012In: Archaeologists and the Digital:: Towards Strategies of Engagement / [ed] Chiara Bonacchi, London: Archetype Publications Ltd., 2012, p. 15-24Chapter in book (Refereed)
  • 14.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    UCL Centre for Digital Humanities.
    Understanding archaeological authority in a digital context.2014In: Internet Archaeology, ISSN 1363-5387, E-ISSN 1363-5387, Vol. 38Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    "…with the increasing spread of social media and mobile communication, the social networks of knowledge construction are becoming not only vastly bigger and quicker and less limited by space and time constraints than they have been before, but also more of a threat to established authorities." (Hofheinz 2011, 1426)

    This article considers the issues of archaeological authority, expertise and organisational reputation in the UK from an online perspective, and questions whether the participatory promise of social media technologies can, and should, challenge archaeological authority. It explores how these issues are approached and mediated online, the issues of digital literacy for audience reception, and the approaches used by archaeological organisations to address the challenges of undertaking digital public archaeology projects whilst maintaining archaeological rigour and the visible performance of expertise. It discusses how the concepts of archaeological authority and expertise are demonstrated and practised online, using data from my doctoral research, undertaken from 2011 to 2013. This article questions if the presence of websites dedicated to the promulgation of alternative archaeologies on the Internet can present challenges for the performance of archaeological expertise online, and how organisations monitor and respond to alternative archaeological interpretations and news stories.

  • 15.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    et al.
    UCL, Ctr Digital Humanities, London WC1E 6BT, England.
    Almanza-Sanchez, Jaime
    JAS Archaeologia.
    Do you even know what public archaeology is? Trends, theory, practice, ethics2015In: World archaeology, ISSN 0043-8243, E-ISSN 1470-1375, Vol. 47, no 2, p. 194-211Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Archaeology is a discipline influenced by emerging cultural trends, especially with regard to theoretical approaches to interpretation and practice. Public archaeology is a relatively young approach, still finding its feet, and loose definitions of it have opened the door to multiple perspectives and opportunities. When research agendas include the issue of public engagement, we need to approach our practices critically from the beginning, and consider the consequences of 'doing' public archaeology. Moving beyond an understanding of the theoretical backdrop to our work, we first need to situate our work socially, politically and economically. This article will bring necessary critique to some current trends in public archaeology, proposing that commitment to sustainability, inclusivity and ethics are the basis for a responsible practice.

  • 16.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    Booth, Tom
    Response to 'Brexit, Archaeology and Heritage: Reflections and Agendas'2017In: Papers from the Institute of Archaeology, ISSN 0965-9315, E-ISSN 2041-9015, Vol. 27, no 1, article id 25Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This research was presented at the UCL Brexit, Archaeology and Heritage workshop and here it is summarised as a response to the lead forum article 'Brexit, Archaeology and Heritage: Reflections and Agendas'.

  • 17.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    Dixon, James
    Public Archaeology 2015: letting public engagement with archaeology 'speak for itself'2017In: Internet Archaeology, ISSN 1363-5387, E-ISSN 1363-5387, Vol. 46Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Public Archaeology 2015 was a year-long project dedicated to the creation of public engagement and involvement with archaeological projects and subjects. Month-long projects were devised and enacted by both archaeologists and non-archaeologists, with the impact of the project residing in the moments of engagement themselves rather than critical or academic analysis with the benefit of hindsight. In this short article, the convenors of the project discuss the project's central ethos and its relationship to wider debates on co-production and impact assessment in public archaeology. It expands discussion on the opposition therein between impetus provided by 'experts' and from 'amateurs'. The project aimed to use a different mode of operation to existing 'top-down' or 'bottom-up' models of collaboration, and created a democratic situation where different kinds of public engagement with archaeology took place within a wider context of those central terms — public, archaeology, engagement — being kept intentionally fluid and open to interpretation.

  • 18.
    Richardson, Lorna-Jane
    et al.
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    Lindgren, Simon
    Umeå University, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Sociology.
    Online tribes and digital authority: what can social theory bring to digital archaeology?2017In: Open Archaeology, E-ISSN 2300-6560, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 139-148Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    From early discussions of the disruptive potential of computer technologies for archaeological applications, to the present era of digital archaeology as the technical underpinning of modern archaeological practice, we have continued to debate the potential impacts of digital communication and digital capture and storage on our knowledge, profession and communications. The increased use of digital tools and methods for archaeological research and dissemination, as well as what Roosevelt (2015) has referred to as the shift to the digital paradigm within archaeological practice, leads us to suggest that the impact of this paradigm shift requires careful and critical examination. This article will examine the edges of the disciplines of archaeology and sociology, where we aim to advance our understanding of the relationship between digital technologies and archaeological knowledge from a uniquely social perspective, using the theoretical approaches of both classic and modern sociologists. The application of this lens of sociology to digital archaeology equips us to understand how archaeology and archaeological practice is situated in a social world, which is especially relevant in the Global West, where digital technology is ubiquitous. Through a critical consideration of the complexity of use of digital technologies within digital archaeology, we can begin to shift our focus away from the character and method of tools and workflow, to the background of intellectual power and influence. 

1 - 18 of 18
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf