/ Full archive

How AHRC-funded Film RUFUS STONE inspired a proposed project on the Next Generation

AHRC blog has just published an article on a potential new project on youth, gender and sexuality proposed by a team at Bournemouth University. The AHRC supported short film RUFUS STONE  is seven years old this year. Our screenings of this film’s story, particularly to young people, have impressed upon us how a supposedly ‘old’ story – the film is set in rural Britain more than 50 years ago – still resonates with young people today.

Our proposed project, “Rufus Stone … the next Generation’ – will contribute to knowledge on the substantive topic of ‘Post-Millennials’ or ‘Generation Z’ (GenZ), focusing on their anxieties and ambiguous approaches around gender and sexuality. 

Because GenZ is the first generation to be totally hooked up to technology since birth, we want to work with mobile phones and iPads and social media over several months in sessions with youth to produce their own film/video about their lives and relationships.

We’re currently applying for funding to work with young people aged 16-18, involving them in telling their stories, co-created by involving them in every stage of production. We are at the bidding stage now. If you would like to express an interest in joining  the team, please contact Kip Jones for a chat.

Are you interested in testing an App developed at BU and designed to lower blood pressure?

We are continuing to recruit for 2 studies involving our Brythm App, designed at BU. Brythm is based on the principles of slow and deep breathing that have been found to lower blood pressure. Our previous research supports the idea that changing the way you breathe has an impact upon your heart rate and blood pressure. We have developed an App (called Brythm) to exploit the beneficial influence of breathing, which guides users to a personalised, optimal breathing frequency.

We are currently conducting one study on healthy women in a laboratory setting to test the cardiovascular responses to slow and deep breathing, which would require approx 2 hours of your time. The other study involves using the App daily at home for 8 weeks to test the feasibility of using the App. For both studies participants will receive information about their current blood pressure.

Lab Based Cardiovascular Responses Study

Participants must be female non-smokers of reproductive age (18-49 years) who are not currently pregnant. They must also have no prior medical diagnosis of cardiovascular or respiratory disease (including asthma). The entire study requires a single visit to the Cardiorespiratory Research Laboratory in Bournemouth House (3rd floor) lasting approximately 2 hours. During this visit you will be asked to undertake a number of 5-minute sets of slow and deep breathing, guided by our App, while a series of non-invasive and painless cardiovascular measurements are made. The App will be installed on our iPad in the lab and you will not be required to use your own device.

At Home 8-week Feasibility Study

Participants must be aged 40 or over and you must have access to an iOS or Android device capable of downloading and running the Brythm App. More details on device specifications available on request. You will be expected to complete daily 10-minute sessions using the Brythm App for 8 weeks and will have an initial meeting with our Project Manager prior to commencing the study, where you will be given a demonstration of the Brythm App and be given an opportunity to try it for a few minutes. You will also receive an automated blood pressure monitor to take home with you for the duration of the study; you will be asked to use it to make two measurements each day, which will be recorded via the Brythm App. Following the intervention we will ask you to attend a focus group where you will be invited to share your experiences of using the App.

For more information, and to receive a participant information sheet outlining either study in more detail, please contact Malika Felton at mfelton@bournemouth.ac.uk or 01202 961845.

Fit for nothing: where it all went wrong for Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games legacy

File 20180413 127631 123pllx.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1

PA, CC BY-SA

By Lynda Challis, Bournemouth University

“Our vision is to host a successful, safe and secure Games that deliver a lasting legacy for the whole of Scotland, and to maximise the opportunities in the run up to, during, and after the Games.”

This was the promise made by the Scottish government to the Commonwealth in 2014. In the 12 days of competition that followed, the city of Glasgow achieved a “hero-like status”, Team Scotland achieved its biggest-ever medal haul of 53 medals, and the games recorded the highest number of tickets sold for a sporting event in Scottish history.

Minister for sport Aileen Campbell hailed the event as a huge success by announcing that Glasgow’s Commonwealth Games was the largest sporting and cultural event ever held in Scotland and had changed the lives of thousands of people.

The message from the host nation was clear: the games were not just about showcasing elite athletes, but about delivering a legacy that would provide a flourishing economy, celebrate cultural diversity, embrace sustainable living, and create a more physically active nation. But four years on, not all those ambitions have been achieved.

Getting a nation off the couch

The games were considered a golden opportunity for Scotland to harness the power of sport to motivate a sedentary nation. A ten-year implementation plan was launched in 2014 to tackle physical inactivity across Scotland as well as myriad other initiatives to support communities in improving the local sporting infrastructure.

Two and a half years after the games, an interim report by the Scottish parliament’s Health and Sport Committee was undertaken to assess the progress made in increasing physical activity levels across Scotland.

The report concluded that there was no evidence of an active legacy being achievable. More alarmingly, any evidence of a relationship between the hosting of a major sporting event and raising the host nation’s physical activity levels was inconclusive.

This raises serious questions as to why such an ambitious legacy aim was included in the first place given the likelihood of failure. It could be that the Scottish government included the aim of increasing participation within its legacy pledge as a desperate attempt to address Scotland’s poor health profile, one of the worst in Europe.

Glasgow’s east end, the main site of the 2014 Commonwealth Games, is considered one of the poorest urban areas in Europe. Chris Perkins/Flickr, CC BY-SA

A final evaluation report on the impact of the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth Games published by the Scottish government days before the opening ceremony of the Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games highlighted the harsh reality that the active legacy programme had not “resulted in a step change in population levels of physical activity in Scotland”.

In fact, the GoWell East study that tracked participant levels within the surrounding area of Glasgow found that overall rates had actually declined, with just over 53% achieving the recommended physical activity levels in 2016, compared to 62% in 2012.

However, the east end community surrounding the main games site is one of the most deprived areas in Scotland, with some of the worst statistics in Europe for child poverty, health, crime, and alcohol and drug abuse. This could account for the declines in physical activity levels in the east end of Glasgow as the underlying reasons behind social inequalities in sports participation is poverty – not having the income to spend on sport.

Policy fail

But Glasgow is not alone. Other nations hosting major sporting events have failed to capitalise on the perception that a sprinkling of magic over a big sports event will motivate a population to become active. Data that tracked participation levels of Australians before, during and after the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games found they had declined, due – ironically – to Australians spending more time watching sport on TV than taking part themselves.

Undoubtedly, many nations believe that elite sporting success and the hosting of major sporting events on home turf can encourage mass involvement, and in turn create an active nation. An example of this is London’s 2012 Olympic Games, which promised to “do something no other Olympic Games host nation had done before”: inspire a new generation of young people to get involved, get active and take part in sport. This bold statement from the UK government has since been questioned, because in fact, no previous games had even attempted to leverage improved physical activity as a legacy outcome.

Despite their glossy success, London’s Olympics also failed to improve rates of participation in sport. PA, CC BY-SA

It became abundantly clear post-London 2012 that the Olympic Legacy promise had failed to come to fruition with figures showing no more young people taking part in sport than before the games. As has been argued elsewhere, there is still a lack of robust evidence to suggest that the presumed trickle-down effect of hosting a major sporting event can trigger an increase in physical activity.

Big spend but no return

The failure of London 2012 and Glasgow 2014 to create and inspire a nation to get active is not really surprising. For more than 40 years, community sports policy in Britain has been plagued by failings to meet physical activity performance indicators set by governments.

This could be down to a variety of factors including: poor policy analysis to inform future policy-making decisions; overambitious or naïve participation targets; inadequate resources to deliver long-term programmes; and changes in direction leading to ambiguity regarding who is responsible for delivery.

Given these issues, it is understandable that grass-roots sport policies and major sporting events have failed to encourage more people to get active. Future government policy on community sport needs to have an all-party group commitment, that is evidence-based to ensure objectives are realistic. It needs to have a long-term plan and be adequately funded to ensure that there are real and lasting results.

In the end, we have to face a difficult truth: governments continue to invest in costly elite sport and big extravagant sporting events that come at the expense of community sport.

Lynda Challis, Academic in Sports Development, Bournemouth University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

BUDMC researchers deliver panel at Premier global conference in California

conferences

Cutting-edge research and agenda setting ideas of Bournemouth University Disaster Management Centre (BUDMC) were presented at a dedicated BUDMC panel delivered at the 59th Convention of the International Studies Association (ISA – widely regarded as the leading global academic association dedicated to international studies) in San Francisco, California, USA on 7 April 2018.

The panel, chaired by Professor Lee Miles (Professor of Crisis and Disaster Management) was awarded after a highly competitive submission process. The panel together combined a Professor, a Senior Research Fellow (Dr Henry Bang) and three BUDMC PhD candidates (Michael Clark, Grace Kingsbury and James Stride) to deliver papers on their respective research in disaster management. The panel was distinctive in that the panellists also had significant experience, not just in the academic study of disaster management, but also in working in the field and in the crisis management industry – thereby representing practical examples of co-creation and the thriving research environment at the Disaster Management Centre here in Bournemouth.

The panel called ‘Ruling in Unruly Times? Foreign Policy Dynamics of Disaster Management’ opened with a jointly co-authored paper by Professor Lee Miles, Dr Henry Bang and Michael Clark on understanding resistance factors and enhancing entrepreneurial resilience in disaster management in Ghana that represented unique research findings from the BUDMC’s acclaimed AFRIGATE project. This was followed by research papers delivered by BUDMC PhD candidates on ‘Synthesizing Foreign Policy Considerations and Health Systems Resilience’ in Africa’ (Michael Clark), ‘The International Dimensions of Maritime Disasters’ (James Stride) and a co-authored paper by PhD candidate, Grace Kingsbury and Professor Lee Miles, on ‘The Scandinavian Foreign Policy Collective: Managing Greater Imperatives of Resilience and Safety’ – that each demonstrated the depth of international-focused work undertaken by BUDMC researchers. The panel were subject to notable scrutiny by a discussant, and a vibrant debate; and the papers were warmly welcomed by an international audience of prominent academics from the field of international studies. The papers will form the basis of manuscripts to be submitted to key journals by summer 2018.

For more information, contact Professor Lee Miles (lmiles@bournemouth.ac.uk) or Dr Henry Bang (hbang@bournemouth.ac.uk).

ADRC presented at a BU Public Lecture Day

Last month the team from the Ageing and Dementia Research Centre (ADRC) delivered a highly successful  afternoon for the public (https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/bu-public-lecture-day-registration-42189764722). With over 50 people in attendance, key research undertaken by the centre was covered  that included a range of topics affecting people living with dementia. Post Doc Dr Natalia Adamczewska presented work led by Dr Ben Hicks on Promoting inclusion through gaming technology, followed by a talk given with students from Dr Michelle Board – Dementia education and training using Virtual Reality. After the break, Prof Jan Wiener spoke on Reducing spatial disorientation in people with dementia, ending with Prof Jane Murphy talking about Providing good nutrition and hydration in people with dementia: some practical solution. Overall the participants rated the event very highly giving an amazing average score of 8.7/10  supported by  really positive comments on the event.
 
‘I was pleased to learn how much research was going on in the community to address the increasing problem of dementia.’
‘The varied and interesting subjects and the enthusiasm with which they were delivered. Hopefully they will play a part in the dementia care very soon.’
‘Informative and engaging presentations’
‘Congratulations on the efforts made in the field of dementia!’

Deadline extended – call for EoIs: Leaders for UOA 2 and UOA 3 to drive REF 2021 preparations

Research assessment

The deadline for expressions of interest for Leaders for UOAs 2 and 3 has been extended to Monday 16 April at 5pm. EoIs should be sent by email to Julie Northam (Head of RKEO).

BU is preparing submissions for units of assessment (UOAs) for REF 2021. Preparation for each UOA is led by a UOA Leader who is supported by an Impact Champion and an Output Champion. From March 2018, UOA Leaders are recruited via an open and transparent process. All academic staff have the opportunity to put themselves forward for UOA Leader roles. The roles are until December 2020.

We are currently seeking expressions of interest (EoIs) from academic staff interested in leading preparations for two UOAs:

  • Public health, health services and primary care
  • Allied health professions, dentistry, nursing and pharmacy

UOA Leaders serve a term up to December 2020, although they can choose to step down during this time. The UOA Leader undertakes a vital role in driving and delivering BU’s REF submission, influencing the University’s preparations, shaping optimal submissions for each UOA and ultimately having a significant effect on BU’s REF 2021 results.

Key responsibilities of the UOA Leader role include:

  • Providing leadership, advice and support on all issues relating to research planning, impact, performance metrics and published guidance relating to the UOA
  • Considering the widest available staff pool for the UOA and present these options to the REF Committee (being mindful of where this potentially impacts upon other UOAs)
  • Having an institutional outlook for the REF, i.e. aiming to optimise BU’s overall REF performance
  • Optimising the UOA submission and that of related UOAs by working to mitigate weaknesses and to highlight strengths across all aspects of the submission
  • Ensuring that outputs undergo rigorous review, internally and externally in order to assess quality prior to inclusion for REF
  • Working with Impact champions and the Impact Working Group to understand the interrelationship of case study quality, selection, placement and staff numbers for the UOA
  • Leading on REF communications within departments represented in the UOA and be the key point of contact and advice with regard to the UOA for Heads of research entities, DDRPPs and Executive Deans
  • Working closely with RKEO who are managing the central REF preparation and submission process
  • Attend the REF Committee meetings

Being a UOA Leader is a big commitment and is recognised accordingly. UOA Leaders are given time to attend meetings and take responsibility for tasks. As such potential applicants should discuss their workload balance with their Head of Department before applying.

 

Application process:

To apply for either role, please submit a short statement (suggested length 300 words) stating which role you are interested in and explaining your interest in the role and what you could bring to it. This should be sent by email to Julie Northam by 5pm on Monday 16 April 2018.

The EoIs will be reviewed by a gender balanced panel comprising a DDRPP and a member of the professoriate. Applicants successful at this stage will be invited to an interview with the same panel.

The selection criteria used at EoI and interview stage are outlined below. Each criterion carries a total possible score of 5. The role will be offered to the highest scoring applicant. A member of the panel will provide feedback to all applicants.

  • Commitment, motivation and enthusiasm (scored out of 5): Being a UOA Leader is a big commitment. UOA Leaders need to be willing and able to make this commitment. They need to be enthusiastic about the REF and boosting research performance.
  • Skills and knowledge (scored out of 5): UOA Leaders should bring with them skills and knowledge to optimise BU’s REF preparations and submission (e.g. knowledge of the REF process, expertise in research metrics, leadership experience, knowledge about impact, experience of writing and delivering research strategies, etc).
  • Plans for preparing the UOA submission and awareness of the potential challenges and opportunities UOA Leaders are responsible for driving and delivering the UOA’s submission to REF 2021 whilst also maintaining an institutional outlook to optimise BU’s overall REF performance. They should have ideas for how they will do this and the potential challenges and opportunities of this, specific to the UOA.

 

Questions:

Questions regarding the process should be directed to Julie Northam (Head of RKEO).

UOA-specific questions should be directed to Prof Vanora Hundley (Deputy Dean for Research in HSS) or to Prof Tiantian Zhang (Deputy Dean for Research in FST)

Deadline today – call for EoIs: Leaders for UOA 2 and UOA 3 to drive REF 2021 preparations

Research assessment

Today (12 April) at 5pm is the deadline for EoIs for Leaders for UOAs 2 and 3. EoIs should be sent by email to Julie Northam (Head of RKEO).

BU is preparing submissions for units of assessment (UOAs) for REF 2021. Preparation for each UOA is led by a UOA Leader who is supported by an Impact Champion and an Output Champion. From March 2018, UOA Leaders are recruited via an open and transparent process. All academic staff have the opportunity to put themselves forward for UOA Leader roles. The roles are until December 2020.

We are currently seeking expressions of interest (EoIs) from academic staff interested in leading preparations for two UOAs:

  • Public health, health services and primary care
  • Allied health professions, dentistry, nursing and pharmacy

UOA Leaders serve a term up to December 2020, although they can choose to step down during this time. The UOA Leader undertakes a vital role in driving and delivering BU’s REF submission, influencing the University’s preparations, shaping optimal submissions for each UOA and ultimately having a significant effect on BU’s REF 2021 results.

Key responsibilities of the UOA Leader role include:

  • Providing leadership, advice and support on all issues relating to research planning, impact, performance metrics and published guidance relating to the UOA
  • Considering the widest available staff pool for the UOA and present these options to the REF Committee (being mindful of where this potentially impacts upon other UOAs)
  • Having an institutional outlook for the REF, i.e. aiming to optimise BU’s overall REF performance
  • Optimising the UOA submission and that of related UOAs by working to mitigate weaknesses and to highlight strengths across all aspects of the submission
  • Ensuring that outputs undergo rigorous review, internally and externally in order to assess quality prior to inclusion for REF
  • Working with Impact champions and the Impact Working Group to understand the interrelationship of case study quality, selection, placement and staff numbers for the UOA
  • Leading on REF communications within departments represented in the UOA and be the key point of contact and advice with regard to the UOA for Heads of research entities, DDRPPs and Executive Deans
  • Working closely with RKEO who are managing the central REF preparation and submission process
  • Attend the REF Committee meetings

Being a UOA Leader is a big commitment and is recognised accordingly. UOA Leaders are given time to attend meetings and take responsibility for tasks. As such potential applicants should discuss their workload balance with their Head of Department before applying.

 

Application process:

To apply for either role, please submit a short statement (suggested length 300 words) stating which role you are interested in and explaining your interest in the role and what you could bring to it. This should be sent by email to Julie Northam by 5pm on Thursday 12 April 2018.

The EoIs will be reviewed by a gender balanced panel comprising a DDRPP and a member of the professoriate. Applicants successful at this stage will be invited to an interview with the same panel.

The selection criteria used at EoI and interview stage are outlined below. Each criterion carries a total possible score of 5. The role will be offered to the highest scoring applicant. A member of the panel will provide feedback to all applicants.

  • Commitment, motivation and enthusiasm (scored out of 5): Being a UOA Leader is a big commitment. UOA Leaders need to be willing and able to make this commitment. They need to be enthusiastic about the REF and boosting research performance.
  • Skills and knowledge (scored out of 5): UOA Leaders should bring with them skills and knowledge to optimise BU’s REF preparations and submission (e.g. knowledge of the REF process, expertise in research metrics, leadership experience, knowledge about impact, experience of writing and delivering research strategies, etc).
  • Plans for preparing the UOA submission and awareness of the potential challenges and opportunities UOA Leaders are responsible for driving and delivering the UOA’s submission to REF 2021 whilst also maintaining an institutional outlook to optimise BU’s overall REF performance. They should have ideas for how they will do this and the potential challenges and opportunities of this, specific to the UOA.

 

Questions:

Questions regarding the process should be directed to Julie Northam (Head of RKEO).

UOA-specific questions should be directed to Prof Vanora Hundley (Deputy Dean for Research in HSS) or to Prof Tiantian Zhang (Deputy Dean for Research in FST)

BU’s PGR student Isabell Nessel has been awarded New Investigator Award and will be presenting at the 13thCongress of the International Society for the Study of Fatty Acids and Lipids (ISSFAL)

PG research

The 13th Congress of the International Society for the Study of Fatty Acids and Lipids (ISSFAL) http://www.issfal.org/ will be held in Las Vegas, USA in May 2018. BU will be highly represented at this biennial congress, which is the biggest and most prestigious congress in the field of fatty acid and lipid research. Isabell Nessel, a third year PhD student in the Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, will present her PhD work at this congress. She is supervised by Dr Simon Dyall and Prof Minesh Khashu.

Her research aims to investigate ways to increase the intake of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in the perinatal period and to address whether this intake is associated with any adverse effects, due to the susceptibility of the fatty acids to oxygen-related damage. Isabell secures a prestigious oral presentation, and is also presenting two posters at this international congress, which expects around 800 delegates!

Isabell was awarded a full Santander Mobility Award to cover the travel costs to Las Vegas. Furthermore, Isabell won a New Investigator Award, which is granted by ISSFAL in conjunction with the Congress to recognise and encourage excellent abstract submissions.

The Congress will be an excellent opportunity for her to present her PhD work, and to learn about the latest research and the newest methods.

Isabell would like to express her gratitude to Santander, ISSFAL, and Bournemouth University for making this trip possible, and to her supervisors Dr Simon Dyall and Prof Minesh Khashu for their support with the applications and abstracts!

 

Look out for her blog post after the conference.

If you would like to know more about her research in the meantime, e-mail her at inessel@bournemouth.ac.uk

Board the Pre-Award Omnibus on 18th April 2018

Do you wonder how best to engage with pre-award processes at BU?

Are research application finances a bit of a mystery?

Does the costing side of your research application deter you from applying?

Are you not quite sure where to start?

If so, then come along to these sessions on Wednesday, 18th April at Talbot Campus:

Please follow the links above to reserve your place at as many of these events as you are able to attend. You will then receive a meeting request confirming the location of each session.

If you need help outside these workshops, please contact relevant member of the Funding Development Team in the Research & Knowledge Exchange Office.

Hungary elections: it’s the most popular party on Facebook, so why haven’t you heard of the Two-Tailed Dog?

File 20180409 114084 uo115m.jpg?ixlib=rb 1.1

EPA/Tibor Illyes

By Annamaria Neag, Bournemouth University and Richard Berger, Bournemouth University

With more than 278,000 followers on Facebook, Hungary’s Two-Tailed Dog Party was the the most popular party on social media to stand in the country’s 2018 election. However, its online popularity did not help win seats in the vote which delivered Viktor Orbán a third term as prime minister by a landslide. In an anti-establishment approach, the Dogs’ campaign was carried out entirely by volunteers and official campaign funds were used to support community projects.

Despite only coming away with 1.71% of the votes, however, the party has pushed an important boundary in Hungarian politics.

Puppy training

The Two-Tailed Dog Party was founded in 2006, although formal recognition didn’t come until 2014. It defined itself as a joke party from the start, becoming famous for making fun of other political groups – mainly the mainstream Fidesz, led by Orbán.

Its activities range from street art to graffiti to urban gardening. It even smuggles soap and toilet paper into hospitals in order to highlight the dire state of some healthcare facilities. In 2016, the party crowdfunded €100,000 to cover the country in satirical posters mocking the government’s call to vote against EU refugee quotas in an impending referendum.

Then in 2018, just a couple of weeks before the deadline, the party managed to get enough signatures to be able to participate in the national parliamentary elections. The jokers were getting serious.

A Two-Tailed Dog sticker appears on a Budapest lamp post.

In an election campaign dominated by the supposed “threat” posed by immigration and the perceived influx of migrants to Hungary, the Two-Tailed Dog party used social media to draw attention to a statistic published on the national police website showing that one migrant had been “caught” in the last 30 days. Its satirical response to this shocking figure read: “There is an enormous interest in our country. But we cannot rest assured: The migrant entered our country.”

Domestication

All political parties use emotions to persuade people to vote for them. The Two-Tailed Dog party and its kind are trying to undermine establishment organisations by turning humour into political action.

In a process social scientists call “kynicism”, the Two-Tailed Dog party borrowed and remixed government messages for its own aims. The idea is to mock the government’s rhetoric in order to disperse fear and anxiety.

In Hungary, it’s unclear what the future holds for the Two-Tailed Dog party, or these joke parties more broadly. There is a fundamental mismatch between the way everyday politics works and the vision of the party.

Party leader Gergő Kovács told us:

I can’t really tell how many of our Facebook fans would vote for us … To be honest, for me the parliamentary elections are not important. For me, it’s much more important to see what we can do … I have to confess: my aim is to create something creative and funny, and yet meaningful … I think it is useless to have one more opposition party that has a serious programme. I have no interest to do politics in the traditional way.

If the case of Iceland’s Pirate party shows us anything, it is that parties like the Two-Tailed Dog have a tendency to lose their edge once they gain political influence. In 2016 the pirates topped opinion polls, and seemed to become a real political force by winning ten seats in the parliament. However, in the latest elections, they won only six seats.

Alternative parties, like the Two-Tailed Dog exist to mock from outside the mainstream. But what’s the point of a political party if it doesn’t really want to get elected and to introduce its policies?

For now, that’s not a question the Two-Tailed dogs need to answer, since they failed to make it into parliament.

But the group has nonetheless radically re-energised young people. It has tested the limits of convention in Hungary’s political process. Kovács told us that when it comes to larger campaigns, “two thirds, or three quarters, of our ideas come from the people … For instance, we write an economic programme, post it to Facebook and in a couple of minutes, there are three to four better ideas in the comments, so we take it down and add these ideas. So, in fact it really comes from the people”. The next step is for the group to translate those likes on social media into actual votes.

Annamaria Neag, Marie Curie Research Fellow, Bournemouth University and Richard Berger, Associate Professor, Head of Research and Professional Practice, Department of Media Production, Bournemouth University

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.