School of Anthropology & Conservation

Excellence in diversity Global in reach


Prof Michael Fischer

Professor of Anthropological Sciences

Director of Research (Anthropology); Chief Examiner

 

profile image for Prof Michael  Fischer

Michael D. Fischer is an anthropologist who has worked mainly in the Punjab and Swat in Pakistan, and the Cook Islands. His major interests are in the representation and structure of indigenous knowledge, cultural informatics, and the interrelationships between ideation and the material contexts within which ideation is expressed.

Fischer is Professor of Anthropological Sciences in the School of Anthropology and Conservation at the University of Kent and is currently Director of the Centre for Social Anthropology and Computing, the University of Kent at Canterbury.

He has received grants from the ESRC, AHRB, SERC, MRC, HEFCE, JISC, Leverhulme and Nuffield, on topics including ethnography of Pakistan and the Cook Islands, formal analysis, multi-media databases, coding methods, virtual reality, performance and large scale networked databases, historical anthropology and textual markup

back to top
Also view these in the Kent Academic Repository
Books
Articles

    Fischer, M.D. and Lyon, S.M. and Sosna, D. et al. (2013) Harmonizing Diversity: Tuning Anthropological Research to Complexity. Social Science Computer Review, 31 (1). pp. 3-15. ISSN 0894-4393.

    Abstract

    The contributions in this issue of Social Science Computer Review represent a range of computational approaches to theoretical and disciplinary specializations in anthropology that reflect on and expand the future orientation and practice of the formal and comparative agenda in the context of an increasing emphasis on complexity in anthropology as a discipline. Themes covered in this issue include kinship, funerary burials, urban legends, eye tracking and looking at mode influences on online data collection. A common theme throughout the papers is examining the relationship between global emergent processes and structures and the local individual contributions to this emergence, and how the local and global contexts influence each other. We argue that unless complexity is addressed more overtly by leveraging computational approaches to data collection, analysis and theory building, anthropology and social science more generally face an existential challenge if they are to continue to pursue extended field research exercise, intersubjective productions, deep personal involvement, interaction with materiality and engagement with people whilst generating research outcomes of relevance to the world beyond the narrow confines of specialist journals and conferences.

    Read, D.R. and Fischer, M.D. and Leaf, M.J. (2013) What Are Kinship Terminologies, and Why Do We Care? A Computational Approach to Analyzing Symbolic Domains. Social Science Computer Review, 31 (1). pp. 16-44. ISSN 0894-4393.

    Abstract

    Kinship is a fundamental feature and basis of human societies. We describe a set of computational tools and services, the Kinship Algebra Modeler, and the logic that underlies these. These were developed to improve how we understand both the fundamental facts of kinship, and how people use kinship as a resource in their lives. Mathematical formalism applied to cultural concepts is more than an exercise in model building, as it provides a way to represent and explore logical consistency and implications. The logic underlying kinship is explored here through the kin term computations made by users of a terminology when computing the kinship relation one person has to another by referring to a third person for whom each has a kin term relationship. Kinship Algebra Modeler provides a set of tools, services and an architecture to explore kinship terminologies and their properties in an accessible manner.

    Kemp-Benedict, E.J. and Bharwani, S. and Fischer, M.D. (2010) Using matching methods to link social and physical analyses for sustainability planning. Ecology and Society, 15 (3). pp. 4-4. ISSN 1708-3087.

    Abstract

    Sustainability planning requires an understanding of social and physical systems and their interactions. However, there is a mismatch between the methods of the social sciences and those of the natural sciences. Although there have been numerous attempts to adapt the methods of the natural sciences for use in the social sciences, the results are usually unsatisfactory. Key features of societies such as institutions and power relationships, and of individuals such as the rich symbolic systems by which individuals transmit knowledge, do not lend themselves to the standard analytical methods of the natural sciences. We argue that rather than transfer the methods of one discipline to the other, an appropriate goal can be to seek “matching methods” that work at the boundary between the social and natural sciences. We discuss how knowledge elicitation tools (KnETs) can be used to develop matching methods. An explicit example is provided by combining a KnETs-derived decision tree with a physical water allocation model that was built using the scenario-based Water Evaluation and Planning (WEAP) software. We conclude that, through a relatively weak link, the social and physical domains can be effectively combined for integrated planning using matching methods, thereby permitting a more holistic approach to sustainable resource planning.

    Fischer, M.D. (2008) culture, theory-building, multi-agent modelling, formalization. Structure and Dynamics, 3 (2). pp. 1-16. ISSN 1554-3374.

    Abstract

    Formalization is typically associated by both supporters and detractors of formal methods with an emphasis on form over content or meaning. However well founded, this association fails to capture why we employ (or not) formal descriptions of what we are describing. One problem arises when we try to directly link human thought to human behavior (or vice versa); assuming the process of going from one to the other is complex and idiosyncratic, but direct. In this paper I examine an approach to developing a formal system that helps us represent the relationship between ideational and behavioral aspects of socio-cultural phenomena in a manner that is consistent with, and helps address the connections between, symbolic and materialist approaches. People embedded in cultural processes demonstrate remarkable powers of creation, transformation, stability and regulation. Culture gives agents the power to hyper-adapt: not only can they achieve local minima and maxima, they modify or create the conditions for new adaptations. Culture transcends material and behavioral contexts. Cultural solutions are instantiated in material and behavioral terms, but are based in large part on ‘invented’ symbolic constructions of the interaction space and its elements. We will present an example of how a symbolic system 'drives' the material organization of human groups, explore how symbolic systems act over material domains as a general case, and examine some of the implications of this for multi-agent modelling as a theory-building process.

    Fischer, M.D. (2006) The ideation and instantiation of arranging marriage within an urban community in Pakistan, 1982-2000. Contemporary South Asia, 15 (3). pp. 325-339. ISSN 0958-4935.

    Abstract

    Using longitudinal data and marriage arrangements in urban Pakistan, this paper discusses the consequences of changes in ideational systems. Merging different theoretical approaches (or cultures) within cultural anthropology, it argues that, while symbol systems are not an analogue of an external world, nevertheless they are effective drivers for how people relate to, adapt to and modify the external relations within which they are embedded. This allows for the accommodation of analytic viewpoints that favour both the symbolic construction of reality and the behavioural relations of how this construction is enacted.

Total publications in KAR: 25 [See all in KAR]

 

 

back to top

Programme convenor of MA in Social Anthropology & Computing and teaching the following modules:

BA modules

SE307: Thinkers and Theories (convenor)

SE308: Skills for Anthropology and Conservation

SE587: Ethnographies 2

SE594: Anthropology and Development

SE595: Social Computing

MA modules

SE806: Research Methods in Social Anthropology 2

SE861: The Ethnography of Central Asian Societies

back to top

School of Anthropology and Conservation - © University of Kent

School of Anthropology and Conservation, Marlowe Building, The University of Kent, Canterbury, Kent, CT2 7NR, T: +44 (0)1227 827056

Last Updated: 29/09/2012