Send message to Author

Short abstract:

This work introduces a dialogue-centered approach to academic knowledge production, utilizing speech-to-text technology to create article drafts. It highlights tensions between automated efficiency and intellectual depth, challenging traditional hierarchies of scholarly formats.

Long abstract:

In the midst of radical transformations in scholarly publishing driven by automated processes and AI tools, podcasting emerges as a counterforce with the potential to recentralize the practice of human dialogues in knowledge creation and dissemination. Particularly in podcast studies, researchers are experimenting not only with 'sonifying' their written works into spoken audio forms but also with voice-recorded peer reviews and conversation/interview-based co-authored articles. These endeavors aim to establish alternative publication channels, challenge existing power structures and norms within academic knowledge production, and reevaluate the primacy of writing in communicating research.

Accordingly, this proposal suggests positioning conversation as the focal point of publishable production, utilizing speech-to-text technology to draft an initial basis for academic articles. Drawing from my experience with cross-cultural conversational analysis of three distinct podcast productions centered on the same story, I present an auto-methodological perspective on how voice and conversation can prompt a reassessment of what qualifies as publishable scholarly work.

This method involves recording a semi-structured discussion, generating a written article draft with speech-to-text software, collaboratively revising the automated transcription, and subsequently reflecting on the roles of voice, language, and accent as mediators of the analysis. While initially designed to explore sound and voice-based cultural artifacts, this method prompts us to confront contemporary tensions in scholarly publication. These tensions include the dichotomies between written and spoken scholarly outlets, conventional and exploratory formats versus linear and standardized ones, and the balance between automated efficiency in academic writing and the intellectual depth and freedom fostered by ongoing dialogue.