3 ms·
The actual article http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/22401/3/Main%20Document.pdf http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/22401/3/Main%20Docume... seems to b
by RcouF1uZ4gsC 7y ago
The actual article http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/22401/3/Main%20Document.pdf http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/22401/3/Main%20Docume... seems to be an example of using jargon to obfuscate
> We show that energy gauges on portable technology (e.g. battery icons in phones) are
a key to energy hysteresis. Through “hermeneutic reflection” on the battery charge in
portable technology and information about accessibility of infrastructure outlets in the city,
consumers adapt practices (Bourdieu 1990a: 99) in order to ‘re-embed’ or ‘pin down’
infrastructure, technology and social relations (Giddens 2013:79). The aim of these practices
is to attain ‘psychological comfort’ in vulnerable circumstances (Giddens 2013: 155).
However, rather than a return to equilibrium as in Phipps and Ozanne’s (2017), single domain
context we see energy consumption through portable technology as leading to a system of
contingency planning that anticipates disequilibrium (see figure 1).
- gumby 7y agoThat paragraph doesn't seem like jargon to me (though I admit I used to work in a field where "hermeneutic" was an ordinary term). But part from that perhaps uncommon term, it all seems pretty straightforward and in fact doesn't appear to use any domain-specific terms.
- cududa 7y agoJust because you don’t understand a specific scientific term doesn’t make it “jargon”. Plenty of perfectly valid technical docs would be considered invalid jargon if you held them to the same standard.
- taneq 7y agoJust because you understand a specific scientific term doesn't make it cromulent. Plenty of pop-sci articles are perfectly approachable and eschew gratuitous jargon.