@article{1125,
  abstract     = {{Since customers first share their problems with a social networking community before directly addressing a company, social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace or Foursquare will be the interface between customer and company. For this reason, it is assumed that social networks will evolve into a common communication channel – not only between individuals but also between customers and companies. However, social networking has not yet been integrated into customer interaction management (CIM) tools. In general, a CIM application is used by the agents in a contact centre while communicating with the customers. Such systems handle communication across multiple different channels, such as e-mail, telephone, Instant Messaging, letter etc. What we do now is to integrate social networking into CIM applications by adding another communication channel. This allows the company to follow general trends in customer opinions on the Internet, but also record two-sided communication for customer service management and the company’s response will be delivered through the customer’s preferred social networking site.}},
  author       = {{Geierhos, Michaela}},
  issn         = {{17982340}},
  journal      = {{Journal of Advances in Information Technology}},
  keywords     = {{Social Media Business Integration, Multichannel Customer Interaction Management, Contact Centre Application Support}},
  number       = {{4}},
  pages        = {{222--233}},
  publisher    = {{Engineering and Technology Publishing (ETPub)}},
  title        = {{{Customer Interaction 2.0: Adopting Social Media as Customer Service Channel}}},
  doi          = {{10.4304/jait.2.4.222-233}},
  volume       = {{2}},
  year         = {{2011}},
}

@article{17233,
  abstract     = {{It has been proposed that the design of robots might benefit from interactions that are similar to caregiver–child interactions, which is tailored to children’s respective capacities to a high degree. However, so far little is known about how people adapt their tutoring behaviour to robots and whether robots can evoke input that is similar to child-directed interaction. The paper presents detailed analyses of speakers’ linguistic and non-linguistic behaviour, such as action demonstration, in two comparable situations: In one experiment, parents described and explained to their nonverbal infants the use of certain everyday objects; in the other experiment, participants tutored a simulated robot on the same objects. The results, which show considerable differences between the two situations on almost all measures, are discussed in the light of the computer-as-social-actor paradigm and the register hypothesis.}},
  author       = {{Fischer, Kerstin and Foth, Kilian and Rohlfing, Katharina and Wrede, Britta}},
  issn         = {{1572-0381}},
  journal      = {{Interaction Studies}},
  keywords     = {{human–robot interaction (HRI), social communication, register theory, motionese, robotese, child-directed speech (CDS), motherese, mindless transfer, computers-as-social-actors}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{134--161}},
  publisher    = {{John Benjamins Publishing Company}},
  title        = {{{Mindful tutors: Linguistic choice and action demonstration in speech to infants and a simulated robot}}},
  doi          = {{10.1075/is.12.1.06fis}},
  volume       = {{12}},
  year         = {{2011}},
}

@article{17246,
  author       = {{Nomikou, Iris and Rohlfing, Katharina}},
  issn         = {{1943-0612}},
  journal      = {{IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development}},
  keywords     = {{acoustic packaging, mother-child interaction, social learning, multimodal grounding in input, ecology of interactions, synchrony}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{113--128}},
  publisher    = {{Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers (IEEE)}},
  title        = {{{Language Does Something: Body Action and Language in Maternal Input to Three-Month-Olds}}},
  doi          = {{10.1109/TAMD.2011.2140113}},
  volume       = {{3}},
  year         = {{2011}},
}

@inproceedings{17253,
  author       = {{Vollmer, Anna-Lisa and Pitsch, Karola and Lohan, Katrin Solveig and Fritsch, Jannik and Rohlfing, Katharina and Wrede, Britta}},
  booktitle    = {{Development and Learning (ICDL), 2010 IEEE 9th International Conference on Development and Learning}},
  keywords     = {{tutoring interaction, social interaction, video signal processing, robot systems, paediatrics, neurophysiology, Learning, infant, feedback, biology computing, cognitive capabilities, cognition, children}},
  pages        = {{76--81}},
  title        = {{{Developing feedback: How children of different age contribute to a tutoring interaction with adults}}},
  year         = {{2010}},
}

@misc{35007,
  author       = {{Meier, Heiko}},
  booktitle    = {{Sport und Gesellschaft}},
  issn         = {{2366-0465}},
  keywords     = {{Philosophy, Social Sciences (miscellaneous), History}},
  number       = {{2}},
  pages        = {{180--187}},
  publisher    = {{Walter de Gruyter GmbH}},
  title        = {{{Rezension zu Alfred K. Treml „Warum der Berg ruft. Bergsteigen aus evolutionstheoretischer Sicht“}}},
  doi          = {{10.1515/sug-2009-0205}},
  volume       = {{6}},
  year         = {{2009}},
}

@inproceedings{17272,
  abstract     = {{In developmental research, tutoring behavior has been identified as scaffolding infants' learning processes. It has been defined in terms of child-directed speech (Motherese), child-directed motion (Motionese), and contingency. In the field of developmental robotics, research often assumes that in human-robot interaction (HRI), robots are treated similar to infants, because their immature cognitive capabilities benefit from this behavior. However, according to our knowledge, it has barely been studied whether this is true and how exactly humans alter their behavior towards a robotic interaction partner. In this paper, we present results concerning the acceptance of a robotic agent in a social learning scenario obtained via comparison to adults and 8-11 months old infants in equal conditions. These results constitute an important empirical basis for making use of tutoring behavior in social robotics. In our study, we performed a detailed multimodal analysis of HRI in a tutoring situation using the example of a robot simulation equipped with a bottom-up saliency-based attention model. Our results reveal significant differences in hand movement velocity, motion pauses, range of motion, and eye gaze suggesting that for example adults decrease their hand movement velocity in an Adult-Child Interaction (ACI), opposed to an Adult-Adult Interaction (AAI) and this decrease is even higher in the Adult-Robot Interaction (ARI). We also found important differences between ACI and ARI in how the behavior is modified over time as the interaction unfolds. These findings indicate the necessity of integrating top-down feedback structures into a bottom-up system for robots to be fully accepted as interaction partners.}},
  author       = {{Vollmer, Anna-Lisa and Lohan, Katrin Solveig and Fischer, Kerstin and Nagai, Yukie and Pitsch, Karola and Fritsch, Jannik and Rohlfing, Katharina and Wrede, Britta}},
  booktitle    = {{Development and Learning, 2009. ICDL 2009. IEEE 8th International Conference on Development and Learning}},
  keywords     = {{robot simulation, hand movement velocity, robotic interaction partner, robotic agent, robot-directed interaction, multimodal analysis, Motionese, Motherese, intelligent tutoring systems, immature cognitive capability, human computer interaction, eye gaze, child-directed speech, child-directed motion, bottom-up system, bottom-up saliency-based attention model, adult-robot interaction, adult-child interaction, adult-adult interaction, human-robot interaction, action learning, social learning scenario, social robotics, software agents, top-down feedback structures, tutoring behavior}},
  pages        = {{1--6}},
  publisher    = {{IEEE}},
  title        = {{{People modify their tutoring behavior in robot-directed interaction for action learning}}},
  doi          = {{10.1109/DEVLRN.2009.5175516}},
  year         = {{2009}},
}

@article{35908,
  abstract     = {{In the broadest sense social capital reflects the idea of resources rooting in relations between individuals resp. in the embeddings of people in groups, associations, communities and even societies. A central assumption is that social capital - as a resource - is emerging from the quality of these relationships. This quality may be described in a more materialistic sense because these relations open up access to specific resources or assets. But it may also be imbued with valuated connotations, in particular referring to the essential contribution of networks and trust in promoting well-being, a sense of belonging and decency as individuals in entities blessed with social capital are pretended to engage in mutually beneficial collective actions. Therefore social capital applies to peoples’ shared expectations, norms, values, and beliefs, their commitments to each other and eventually their associative capacities to knit the ‘social fabric’. }},
  author       = {{Landhäußer, Sandra and Ziegler, Holger}},
  journal      = {{Social Work & Society}},
  keywords     = {{Social Capital}},
  publisher    = {{Social Work and Society International Online Journal}},
  title        = {{{Social Capital}}},
  doi          = {{https://ejournals.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/187}},
  volume       = {{4}},
  year         = {{2006}},
}

@article{35910,
  abstract     = {{The feature of this paper is a critical assessment of the current discourses about quality of life (QoL) and their implications for Social Work. At first it pictures some major historical backgrounds of the discussion on the improvement of life quality as an aim of societal development. In particular three crucial shifts in the politics of QoL - its 'individualisation', its 'informalisation' and its 'culturalisation' - and their implications for Social Work are critically examined theoretically and empirically referring to the results of an own community-study. The paper concludes with an alternative suggestion reflecting the idea of an 'autonomy-based' approach of democratic equality. }},
  author       = {{Landhäußer, Sandra and Ziegler, Holger}},
  journal      = {{Social Work & Society}},
  keywords     = {{Critical, quality, Social}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{30--58}},
  publisher    = {{Social Work and Society International Online Journal}},
  title        = {{{Social Work and the Quality of Life Politics - A Critical Assessment }}},
  doi          = {{https://ejournals.bib.uni-wuppertal.de/index.php/sws/article/view/206}},
  volume       = {{3}},
  year         = {{2005}},
}