Getting our hands dirty with technology
The role of the performing arts in technological development
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/peri.v16iS8.117599Resumé
This paper argues for the involvement of the performing and applied arts in technological development in the field of Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI). It discusses the challenges and the benefits for the arts, and presents existing methods in the field of RRI. It then describes two practical case studies called gameformances carried out by the authors.
Referencer
Aristotle (1991) The art of rhetoric, (trans.) Lawson-Tancred, H., Penguin Books.
Auslander, Philip. 1999. Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture. New York: Routledge.
Auslander, Philip. 2005. After Liveness: An E-Interview. In Performance Paradigm. Accessed February 20, 2014.
Balme, Christopher. 2010. Distributed Aesthetics: Performance, Media and the Public Sphere. Blending Media, edited by Jerzy Limon. Gdańsk: Theatrum Gedanense Foundation.
Balmer A.S., Calvert J., Marris C., et al. (2015) Taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations: Reflections on working in post-ELSI Spaces in the UK synthetic biology community. Science and Technology Studies, 28(3): 3–25.
Benford, Steve and Giannachi, Gabriella. 2011. Performing Mixed Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Berg, Ine Therese. 2005. Perspektiver På Multimedial Scenekunst: Monster Teater? Master Thesis, University of Oslo.
Berghaus, Günter. 2005. Avant-Garde Performance: Live Events and Electronic Technologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1987) The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press.
Boal, Augusto. 2002. Games for Actors and Non Actors. London: Routledge.
Boal, Augusto. 2008. Theatre of the Oppressed. London: Pluto Press.
Bogost, Ian. 2007. Persuasive Games. The Expressive Power of Videogames. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Calvert, J. & Schyfter, F. (2017) What can science and technology learn from art and design? Reflections on ‘Synthetic Aesthetics’, Social Studies of Science, 47(2): 195–215
Carson, R. (1962) Silent Spring, Houghton Mifflin Co.
Causey, Matthew. 2006. Theatre and Performance in Digital Culture: From Simulation to Embeddedness. London: Routledge.
Chapple, Freda and Chiel, Kattenbelt, eds. 2006. Intermediality in Theatre and Performance.
Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Darsø, L. (2009). Artful Creation. Learning-Tales of Arts-in-Business. Frederiksberg, Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.
Davies, S. Macnaghten, (2010) Narratives of Mastery and Resistance: Lay Ethics of Nanotechnology. Nanoethics 4:141–151. Springer.
Davis, Douglas M. 1973. Art And The Future: A History Prophecy Of The Collaboration Between Science, Technology And Art. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd
De Saille, S. (2015). Innovating innovation policy: the emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2:2, 152–168.
Deterding, Sebastian; Khaled, Rilla; Nacke, Lennart E.; Dixon, Dan. (2011) Gamification: toward a definition. CHI 2011, May 7–12, 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Dixon, Steve. 2007. Digital Performance: A History of New Media in Theatre, Dance,
Performance Art, and Installation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Efstathiou, S. 2016. Is it Possible to Give Scientific Solutions to Grand Challenges? On the idea of Grand Challenges for life science research, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Vol. 56: 48–61.
Efstathiou, S. & Mirmalek, Z. 2014. Interdisciplinarity in Action, in Montuschi, E. and Cartwright, N. (eds.) Understanding Society: Methods, Evidence and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 233-248. New York: Oxford University Press.
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1967. The theatre as an instrument of the criticism of ideologies. Inquiry: An interdisciplinary journal of philosophy, 10:1-4, 298–312.
Fisher, E. 2007. Ethnographic invention: Probing the capacity of laboratory decisions. NanoEthics, 1 (2):155-165.
Fisher, E. & Mahajan, R. L. 2006. Midstream modulation of nanotechnology research in an academic laboratory. Proceedings of International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE2006-14790.
Fisher, E., R. L. Mahajan & Mitcham, C. 2006 Midstream modulation of technology: Governance from within, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26.6, 485–496.
Friedman, B., Kahn, P., & Borning, A. 2002. Value sensitive design: Theory and methods. University of Washington technical report, 02-12.
Frost, Anthony and Ralph Yarrow. 2007. Improvisation in Drama. Basingstoke: Palgrave
MacMillan.
Geelhoed, Erik. 2013. User Requirements in Immersive Mediated Performance Spaces.
Presented at the Remote Encounters Conference, Cardiff, April 12.
Giannachi, Gabriella. 2004. Virtual Theatres: An Introduction. London: Routledge.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Giesekam, Greg. 2007. Staging the Screen: The Use of Film and Video in Theatre. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Hilton, Julian, ed. 1993. New Directions in Theatre. Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press.
Jackson, Shannon and Weems, Marianne. 2015. The Builders Association: Media and Performance in Contemporary Theatre. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.
Jasanoff, S. (2004) Ordering knowledge, ordering society, in Jasanoff S. (ed.) States of Knowledge: The co-production of science and social order, Oxon and New York: Routledge.
Johnstone, Chris. 2005. House of Games: Making Theatre from Everyday Life. London:Nick Hern Books Limited.
Kaprow, Allan. 1993. Essays on the Blurring of Art and Life, edited by Jeff Kelley, California: University of California Press.
Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1983. A Feeling for the Organism. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Klich, Rosemary and Scheer, Edward. 2012. Multimedia Performance. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Kupper, F. 2017. The theatrical debate: Experimenting with technologies on stage. In: van de Poel, Ibom Asveld, Lotte, Mehos, Donna C. (eds.) New Perspectives on Technology in Society, 80-102. Routledge.
Latimer, J. and Puig de la Bellacasa, M. 2013. Re-thinking the ethical: everyday shifts of care in biogerontology, in Priaulx, M. N. and Wrigley, A. (eds.) Ethics, Law and Society, Vol. V: 153–74. Surrey: Ashgate.
Latour, B. 1988. The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. 1992. Where Are the Missing Masses?, in Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law, eds., Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, 225–258. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lehmann, Hans-Thies. 2006. Postdramatic Theatre. London: Routledge.
McGonigal, Jane E. 2006. This Might Be a Game: Ubiquitous Play and Performance at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century. Thesis (PhD). Berkeley: University of California.
Macnaghten, P., Davies, S. R., & Kearnes, M. 2015. Understanding public responses to emerging technologies: a narrative approach. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning,
1-19.
Miller, Arthur I. 2014. Colliding Worlds: How Cutting-Edge Science Is Redefining Contemporary Art. London: W. W. Norton & Company.
Montola, Markus, Jaakko Stenros, and Annika Waern. 2009. Pervasive Games: Theory and Design. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Nicholson, Helen. 2014 (2nd ed). Applied Drama: The Gift of Theatre. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Nydal, R., Myhr, A.I. and Myskja, B. (2015) From ethics of restriction to ethics of construction: ELSA research in Norway, Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies, vol 3. (1): 34–45.
Pérez, Elena. 2016. The Impact of Digital Media on Contemporary Performance. How Digital media Challenge Theatrical Conventions in Multimedia Theatre, telematic and pervasive performance. Thesis (PhD). Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
Polanyi, Michael. 1967. The Tacit Dimension. London: Routledge.
Poremba, Cindy (2007) Critical potential on the brink of the magic circle. DiGRA ´07 - Proceedings of the DiGRA international conference: Situated Play. Vol. 4:2007. The University of Tokyo, Japan.
Prendergast, Monica and Saxton, Juliana. 2016. Applied Theatre: International Case Studies and Challenges for Practice. Chicago: The University Chicago Press.
Prentky, Tim and Preston Sheila. 2009. (eds) Applied Theatre Reader. London: Routledge.
Salvatore, S. and Valsinger, J. 2010. Between the general and the unique: Overcoming the nomothetic and idiographic opposition, Theory and Psychology, Vol. 20(6): 817–833.
Sheppard, Renata M., Wanmin Wu, Z. Yang, Klara Nahrstedt, Lisa Wymore, Gregory Kurillo, Ruzena Bajcsy, and Katherine Mezur. 2007. TEEVE: New Digital Options for Collaborative Dance in Geographically Distributed Tele-Immersive Spaces. ACM Multimedia. Augsburg, Germany, 2007.
Swierstra, T., D. Stemerding & Boenink, M. 2009. Exploring techno-moral change. The case of the obesity pill. In: P.Sollie & M.Duwell [eds] Evaluating New Technologies, p.119–138. Dordrecht: Springer.
Swierstra, T. 2015. Identifying the normative challenges posed by technology’s ‘soft’ impacts. Etikk i praksis-Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, 9(1): 5–20.
Stilgoe. J, Owen, R. and Macnaghten, P. 2013. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy 42, 1568–1580.
Toulmin, S. 1982. How medicine saved the life of ethics. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 25 (4): 736–750.
Tronstad, Ragnhild. 2017. Crossing Cultures: Creating a PhD Programme in Engineering, Art and Design. Berg, Arild Bohemia, Erik Buck, Lyndon Gulden, Tore Kovacevic, Ahmed Pavel, Nenad (Red.), proceedings of E&PDE 2017 – International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. Building Community: Design Education for a Sustainable Future. 1359. The Design Society.
Von Schomberg, R. 2011. Prospects for Technology Assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. In: Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren: Bildungspotenziale transdisziplinärer Methode, P.39–61, Wiesbaden: Springer VS
Wajcman, J. 1991. Feminism Confronts Technology, Cambridge: Polity.
Williams, R. 2018. What do we mean by being critical?, Presentation in Promises, Possibilities and Practices: Celebrating STS in Action, September 28th, NTNU, Trondheim.
Windelband, W. 1904. Geschichte und Naturwissenschaft [History and Natural Science], Strassburg, France: Heitz & Mündel.
Winner, L. (1980) Do Artifacts have politics? Daedalus, Vol. 109, No. 1, Modern Technology: Problem or Opportunity? (Winter,1980), pp. 121–136
Winner, L. (1990) Engineering ethics and political imagination, in Durbin Paul (ed), Broad and Narrow Interpretations of Philosophy of Technology, 53–64.
Åm, H. 2018. Ethics as ritual: Smoothing over moments of dislocation in biomedicine, Sociology of Health and Illness, Vol xx. No xx., p. 1–15.
Auslander, Philip. 1999. Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture. New York: Routledge.
Auslander, Philip. 2005. After Liveness: An E-Interview. In Performance Paradigm. Accessed February 20, 2014.
Balme, Christopher. 2010. Distributed Aesthetics: Performance, Media and the Public Sphere. Blending Media, edited by Jerzy Limon. Gdańsk: Theatrum Gedanense Foundation.
Balmer A.S., Calvert J., Marris C., et al. (2015) Taking roles in interdisciplinary collaborations: Reflections on working in post-ELSI Spaces in the UK synthetic biology community. Science and Technology Studies, 28(3): 3–25.
Benford, Steve and Giannachi, Gabriella. 2011. Performing Mixed Reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Berg, Ine Therese. 2005. Perspektiver På Multimedial Scenekunst: Monster Teater? Master Thesis, University of Oslo.
Berghaus, Günter. 2005. Avant-Garde Performance: Live Events and Electronic Technologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1987) The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, Mass, MIT Press.
Boal, Augusto. 2002. Games for Actors and Non Actors. London: Routledge.
Boal, Augusto. 2008. Theatre of the Oppressed. London: Pluto Press.
Bogost, Ian. 2007. Persuasive Games. The Expressive Power of Videogames. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Calvert, J. & Schyfter, F. (2017) What can science and technology learn from art and design? Reflections on ‘Synthetic Aesthetics’, Social Studies of Science, 47(2): 195–215
Carson, R. (1962) Silent Spring, Houghton Mifflin Co.
Causey, Matthew. 2006. Theatre and Performance in Digital Culture: From Simulation to Embeddedness. London: Routledge.
Chapple, Freda and Chiel, Kattenbelt, eds. 2006. Intermediality in Theatre and Performance.
Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Darsø, L. (2009). Artful Creation. Learning-Tales of Arts-in-Business. Frederiksberg, Denmark: Samfundslitteratur.
Davies, S. Macnaghten, (2010) Narratives of Mastery and Resistance: Lay Ethics of Nanotechnology. Nanoethics 4:141–151. Springer.
Davis, Douglas M. 1973. Art And The Future: A History Prophecy Of The Collaboration Between Science, Technology And Art. London: Thames and Hudson Ltd
De Saille, S. (2015). Innovating innovation policy: the emergence of ‘Responsible Research and Innovation. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2:2, 152–168.
Deterding, Sebastian; Khaled, Rilla; Nacke, Lennart E.; Dixon, Dan. (2011) Gamification: toward a definition. CHI 2011, May 7–12, 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Dixon, Steve. 2007. Digital Performance: A History of New Media in Theatre, Dance,
Performance Art, and Installation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Efstathiou, S. 2016. Is it Possible to Give Scientific Solutions to Grand Challenges? On the idea of Grand Challenges for life science research, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Vol. 56: 48–61.
Efstathiou, S. & Mirmalek, Z. 2014. Interdisciplinarity in Action, in Montuschi, E. and Cartwright, N. (eds.) Understanding Society: Methods, Evidence and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 233-248. New York: Oxford University Press.
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1967. The theatre as an instrument of the criticism of ideologies. Inquiry: An interdisciplinary journal of philosophy, 10:1-4, 298–312.
Fisher, E. 2007. Ethnographic invention: Probing the capacity of laboratory decisions. NanoEthics, 1 (2):155-165.
Fisher, E. & Mahajan, R. L. 2006. Midstream modulation of nanotechnology research in an academic laboratory. Proceedings of International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, IMECE2006-14790.
Fisher, E., R. L. Mahajan & Mitcham, C. 2006 Midstream modulation of technology: Governance from within, Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 26.6, 485–496.
Friedman, B., Kahn, P., & Borning, A. 2002. Value sensitive design: Theory and methods. University of Washington technical report, 02-12.
Frost, Anthony and Ralph Yarrow. 2007. Improvisation in Drama. Basingstoke: Palgrave
MacMillan.
Geelhoed, Erik. 2013. User Requirements in Immersive Mediated Performance Spaces.
Presented at the Remote Encounters Conference, Cardiff, April 12.
Giannachi, Gabriella. 2004. Virtual Theatres: An Introduction. London: Routledge.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P. and Trow, M. (1994) The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
Giesekam, Greg. 2007. Staging the Screen: The Use of Film and Video in Theatre. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Hilton, Julian, ed. 1993. New Directions in Theatre. Basingstoke: The Macmillan Press.
Jackson, Shannon and Weems, Marianne. 2015. The Builders Association: Media and Performance in Contemporary Theatre. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.
Jasanoff, S. (2004) Ordering knowledge, ordering society, in Jasanoff S. (ed.) States of Knowledge: The co-production of science and social order, Oxon and New York: Routledge.
Johnstone, Chris. 2005. House of Games: Making Theatre from Everyday Life. London:Nick Hern Books Limited.
Kaprow, Allan. 1993. Essays on the Blurring of Art and Life, edited by Jeff Kelley, California: University of California Press.
Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1983. A Feeling for the Organism. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Klich, Rosemary and Scheer, Edward. 2012. Multimedia Performance. Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Kupper, F. 2017. The theatrical debate: Experimenting with technologies on stage. In: van de Poel, Ibom Asveld, Lotte, Mehos, Donna C. (eds.) New Perspectives on Technology in Society, 80-102. Routledge.
Latimer, J. and Puig de la Bellacasa, M. 2013. Re-thinking the ethical: everyday shifts of care in biogerontology, in Priaulx, M. N. and Wrigley, A. (eds.) Ethics, Law and Society, Vol. V: 153–74. Surrey: Ashgate.
Latour, B. 1988. The Pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B. 1992. Where Are the Missing Masses?, in Wiebe E. Bijker and John Law, eds., Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, 225–258. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Lehmann, Hans-Thies. 2006. Postdramatic Theatre. London: Routledge.
McGonigal, Jane E. 2006. This Might Be a Game: Ubiquitous Play and Performance at the Turn of the Twenty-First Century. Thesis (PhD). Berkeley: University of California.
Macnaghten, P., Davies, S. R., & Kearnes, M. 2015. Understanding public responses to emerging technologies: a narrative approach. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning,
1-19.
Miller, Arthur I. 2014. Colliding Worlds: How Cutting-Edge Science Is Redefining Contemporary Art. London: W. W. Norton & Company.
Montola, Markus, Jaakko Stenros, and Annika Waern. 2009. Pervasive Games: Theory and Design. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
Nicholson, Helen. 2014 (2nd ed). Applied Drama: The Gift of Theatre. Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Nydal, R., Myhr, A.I. and Myskja, B. (2015) From ethics of restriction to ethics of construction: ELSA research in Norway, Nordic Journal of Science and Technology Studies, vol 3. (1): 34–45.
Pérez, Elena. 2016. The Impact of Digital Media on Contemporary Performance. How Digital media Challenge Theatrical Conventions in Multimedia Theatre, telematic and pervasive performance. Thesis (PhD). Trondheim: Norwegian University of Science and Technology.
Polanyi, Michael. 1967. The Tacit Dimension. London: Routledge.
Poremba, Cindy (2007) Critical potential on the brink of the magic circle. DiGRA ´07 - Proceedings of the DiGRA international conference: Situated Play. Vol. 4:2007. The University of Tokyo, Japan.
Prendergast, Monica and Saxton, Juliana. 2016. Applied Theatre: International Case Studies and Challenges for Practice. Chicago: The University Chicago Press.
Prentky, Tim and Preston Sheila. 2009. (eds) Applied Theatre Reader. London: Routledge.
Salvatore, S. and Valsinger, J. 2010. Between the general and the unique: Overcoming the nomothetic and idiographic opposition, Theory and Psychology, Vol. 20(6): 817–833.
Sheppard, Renata M., Wanmin Wu, Z. Yang, Klara Nahrstedt, Lisa Wymore, Gregory Kurillo, Ruzena Bajcsy, and Katherine Mezur. 2007. TEEVE: New Digital Options for Collaborative Dance in Geographically Distributed Tele-Immersive Spaces. ACM Multimedia. Augsburg, Germany, 2007.
Swierstra, T., D. Stemerding & Boenink, M. 2009. Exploring techno-moral change. The case of the obesity pill. In: P.Sollie & M.Duwell [eds] Evaluating New Technologies, p.119–138. Dordrecht: Springer.
Swierstra, T. 2015. Identifying the normative challenges posed by technology’s ‘soft’ impacts. Etikk i praksis-Nordic Journal of Applied Ethics, 9(1): 5–20.
Stilgoe. J, Owen, R. and Macnaghten, P. 2013. Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy 42, 1568–1580.
Toulmin, S. 1982. How medicine saved the life of ethics. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 25 (4): 736–750.
Tronstad, Ragnhild. 2017. Crossing Cultures: Creating a PhD Programme in Engineering, Art and Design. Berg, Arild Bohemia, Erik Buck, Lyndon Gulden, Tore Kovacevic, Ahmed Pavel, Nenad (Red.), proceedings of E&PDE 2017 – International Conference on Engineering and Product Design Education. Building Community: Design Education for a Sustainable Future. 1359. The Design Society.
Von Schomberg, R. 2011. Prospects for Technology Assessment in a framework of responsible research and innovation. In: Technikfolgen abschätzen lehren: Bildungspotenziale transdisziplinärer Methode, P.39–61, Wiesbaden: Springer VS
Wajcman, J. 1991. Feminism Confronts Technology, Cambridge: Polity.
Williams, R. 2018. What do we mean by being critical?, Presentation in Promises, Possibilities and Practices: Celebrating STS in Action, September 28th, NTNU, Trondheim.
Windelband, W. 1904. Geschichte und Naturwissenschaft [History and Natural Science], Strassburg, France: Heitz & Mündel.
Winner, L. (1980) Do Artifacts have politics? Daedalus, Vol. 109, No. 1, Modern Technology: Problem or Opportunity? (Winter,1980), pp. 121–136
Winner, L. (1990) Engineering ethics and political imagination, in Durbin Paul (ed), Broad and Narrow Interpretations of Philosophy of Technology, 53–64.
Åm, H. 2018. Ethics as ritual: Smoothing over moments of dislocation in biomedicine, Sociology of Health and Illness, Vol xx. No xx., p. 1–15.
Publiceret
2019-12-02
Citation/Eksport
Pérez, E., Efstathiou, S., & Swierstra, T. (2019). Getting our hands dirty with technology: The role of the performing arts in technological development. Peripeti, 16(S8), 104–121. https://doi.org/10.7146/peri.v16iS8.117599
Nummer
Sektion
Temaartikler
Licens
Det følgende vedrører alle Peripeti-udgivelser fra 2024, nr. 39, og senere:
Peripeti er et Diamond Open Access-tidsskrift, der giver direkte open acces til publiceret indhold ud fra princippet om, at det at gøre forskning frit tilgængelig for offentligheden understøtter en større global udveksling af viden.
Forfattere skal ikke betale for indsendelse, redigering eller offentliggørelse af artikler.
Forfattere, der bidrager til Peripeti, bevarer ophavsretten til deres artikler.
Forfattere accepterer at udgive artikler under en Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0-licens. Vilkårene for denne licens tillader brugere frit at kopiere og videredistribuere materialet i ethvert medie eller format og at tilpasse, transformere og bygge videre på materialet, så længe der gives passende kreditering, et link til licensen gives, og eventuelle ændringer angives. Brugere må ikke dele eller tilpasse materialet til kommercielle formål uden samtykke fra licensgiveren. Brugen af licensen må ikke på nogen måde antyde, at licensgiveren støtter tredjeparten eller dennes brug. Licensen kan ikke tilbagekaldes.
Forfattere opfordres til at lægge deres artikler ud på personlige og/eller institutionelle hjemmesider for at sikre endnu større offentlig adgang efter udgivelsen. Forfattere har ret til at arkivere deres artikler i fondes og offentlige institutioners arkiver, men Peripeti anmoder om, at forfattere bruger et direkte link til den publicerede artikel på tidsskriftets hjemmeside, når det er muligt, da Peripeti som en ikke-kommerciel, offentligt finansieret udgiver er afhængig af niveauet af brugeraktivitet på tidsskriftets hjemmeside.
Vedrørende tidligere udgivelser, indtil 2024, herunder nr. 38:
Ophavsretten deles mellem Peripeti og forfatteren/forfatterne. Tidsskriftet er et open access-tidsskrift, der giver direkte adgang til alt indhold baseret på princippet om, at det at gøre forskning frit tilgængelig for offentligheden understøtter en større global udveksling af viden. Brugere kan frit kopiere og dele materiale i ethvert medie eller format, så længe der gives passende kreditering. Enhver anden brug kræver skriftligt samtykke fra indehaverne af ophavsretten.
