Search

This chapter considers how diplomatic negotiations unfold in the digital context. It asks how digital devices, such as mobile phones, screens, or social media apps, challenge core diplomatic norms and procedures; and, more radically, considers what happens to diplomatic negotiations when the interaction itself is conducted virtually or in hybrid formats. Moving beyond an overview of how diplomatic negotiations can be theorized and studied empirically in digital contexts, we suggest that different approaches build on different understandings of ‘the digital’: as an advantage, a challenge, or as a negotiation in itself. We develop these strands in conversation with the IR literature on ‘digital diplomacy’ and illustrate our points with examples of digitalization and diplomatic practice in the European Union. We discuss critical issues, emerging trends, and procedural changes in diplomatic negotiations by relating them to broader societal digitalization trends. Diplomats’ (work) phones, individual digital competencies, and shared institutional norms co-constitute diplomatic negotiations in the digital context. Beyond a much-needed exploration of how diplomats handle digital devices in everyday negotiations, we suggest that emerging debates on the regulation, management, and limits of digital technology will be crucial for our understanding of diplomatic negotiations in the coming years.

Background: Wearable technology is used by consumers and researchers worldwide for continuous activity monitoring in daily life. Results of high-quality laboratory-based validation studies enable us to make a guided decision on which study to rely on and which device to use. However, reviews in adults that focus on the quality of existing laboratory studies are missing. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of wearable validation studies with adults. Eligibility criteria were: (i) study under laboratory conditions with humans (age ≥ 18 years); (ii) validated device outcome must belong to one dimension of the 24-hour physical behavior construct (i.e., intensity, posture/activity type, and biological state); (iii) study protocol must include a criterion measure; (iv) study had to be published in a peer-reviewed English language journal. Studies were identified via a systematic search in five electronic databases as well as back- and forward citation searches. The risk of bias was assessed based on the QUADAS-2 tool with eight signaling questions. Results: Out of 13,285 unique search results, 545 published articles between 1994 and 2022 were included. Most studies (73.8% (N = 420)) validated an intensity measure outcome such as energy expenditure; only 14% (N = 80) and 12.2% (N = 70) of studies validated biological state or posture/activity type outcomes, respectively. Most protocols validated wearables in healthy adults between 18 and 65 years. Most wearables were only validated once. Further, we identified six wearables (i.e., ActiGraph GT3X+, ActiGraph GT9X, Apple Watch 2, Axivity AX3, Fitbit Charge 2, Fitbit, and GENEActiv) that had been used to validate outcomes from all three dimensions, but none of them were consistently ranked with moderate to high validity. Risk of bias assessment resulted in 4.4% (N = 24) of all studies being classified as “low risk”, while 16.5% (N = 90) were classified as “some concerns” and 79.1% (N = 431) as “high risk”. Conclusion

Despite mounting evidence that women in foreign policy often bear the brunt of online hostility, the extent of online gender bias against diplomats remains unexplored. This paper offers the first global analysis of the treatment of women diplomats on social media. Introducing a multidimensional and multilingual methodology for studying online gender bias, it focuses on three critical elements: gendered language, negativity in tweets directed at diplomats, and the visibility of women diplomats. Our unique dataset encompasses ambassadors from 164 countries, their tweets, and the direct responses to these tweets in 65 different languages. Using automated content and sentiment analysis, our findings reveal a crucial gender bias. The language in responses to diplomatic tweets is only mildly gendered and largely pertains to international affairs and, generally, women ambassadors do not receive more negative reactions to their tweets than men, yet the pronounced discrepancy in online visibility stands out as a significant form of gender bias. Women receive a staggering 66.4% fewer retweets than men. By unraveling the invisibility that obscures women diplomats on social media, we hope to spark further research on online bias in international politics.

This article develops a new theoretical approach to digitalisation in diplomacy, resituating conventional understandings of the relationship between diplomacy and technological transformation. Challenging the conception that ‘traditional’ diplomacy is being supplemented or challenged by new forms of ‘digital diplomacy’, we show how the ubiquity of digital devices and technologies makes disentangling analogue from digital diplomatic practices practically impossible today. The argument is developed through ethnographic observations of everyday diplomatic work in the European Union (EU) multilateral setting in Brussels as well as interviews with ambassadors, attachés, seconded diplomats, spokespersons and interpreters. To understand the place of digital technologies in diplomatic work, we develop the concept of blended diplomacy by which we mean the dual process of the entanglement of technical and social doings and the contestation regarding how this entanglement impacts professional diplomatic imaginaries and relations. Drawing on insights from practice theory and the sociology of science, technology and professions, we show how diplomatic actors demarcate their professional territory and protect their positions through boundary work. They draw horizontal boundaries between what they see as ‘real’ diplomatic work and distractions and vertical boundaries between themselves and other diplomatic actors, ranking people around status and skills. Overall, digital technologies are implicated in deeper struggles regarding what it means to be a diplomat. A focus on the blended character of diplomatic practice opens new avenues for research on how digitalisation, in contradictory and uneven ways, shapes norms, identities, and social relations and how it – through reflexivity, anxieties and contestation – may shape international politics.

We study how citizens engage with misinformation on Twitter in Denmark during the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that misinformation regarding facemasks is not corrected through counterarguments or fact-checking. Instead, many tweets rejecting misinformation use humor to mock misinformation spreaders, whom they pejoratively label wearers of “tinfoil hats.” Tweets rejecting misinformation project a superior social position and leave the concerns of misinformation spreaders unaddressed. Our study highlights the role of status in people’s engagement with online misinformation.

Background: Wearable technology is a leading fitness trend in the growing commercial industry and an established method for collecting 24-hour physical behavior data in research studies. High-quality free-living validation studies are required to enable both researchers and consumers to make guided decisions on which study to rely on and which device to use. However, reviews focusing on the quality of free-living validation studies in adults are lacking. Objective: This study aimed to raise researchers' and consumers' attention to the quality of published validation protocols while aiming to identify and compare specific consistencies or inconsistencies between protocols. We aimed to provide a comprehensive and historical overview of which wearable devices have been validated for which purpose and whether they show promise for use in further studies. Methods: Peer-reviewed validation studies from electronic databases, as well as backward and forward citation searches (1970 to July 2021), with the following, required indicators were included: protocol must include real-life conditions, outcome must belong to one dimension of the 24-hour physical behavior construct (intensity, posture or activity type, and biological state), the protocol must include a criterion measure, and study results must be published in English-language journals. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool with 9 questions separated into 4 domains (patient selection or study design, index measure, criterion measure, and flow and time). Results: Of the 13,285 unique search results, 222 (1.67%) articles were included. Most studies (153/237, 64.6%) validated an intensity measure outcome such as energy expenditure. However, only 19.8% (47/237) validated biological state and 15.6% (37/237) validated posture or activity-type outcomes. Across all studies, 163 different wearables were identified. Of these, 58.9% (96/163) were validated only once.

How do Danes interact with misinformation on social media? Which statements and arguments do they use to spread and reject misinformation? We investigate digital misinformation during the Covid-19 pandemic and analyze how citizens spread and reject information about facemasks on Twitter in Denmark. Our study shows that the amount of misinformation is limited, but that false claims are not predominantly countered through fact-checking or dialogue. Instead, users who reject the misinformation often use irony and condescending comments to distance themselves from those who spread misinformation and whose concerns are thus not taken seriously. Our findings question citizens’ ability to effectively correct misinformation online and point to the importance of group affiliation and social status not only in spreading, but also in rejecting digital misinformation.

Vi må opgive tanken om, at korrekt viden i sig selv er nok til at korrigere misinformation på sociale medier. Den rammer nemlig forskelligt afhængigt af politisk observans og identitet, mener professor