Conference participations of FASS Graduate Students

Published on 13.09.2018 15:43

Ayşe Büşra Topal (Conflict Analysis and Resolution MA)

Conflict Analysis and Resolution MA student Ayşe Büşra Topal attended “Junior researcher programme’s conference” organized by JRP in Cambridge University on 16th of August. Ayşe Büşra Topal presented her co-author paper entitled “How identity leadership fosters commitment towards the organization”.


According to the social identity approach to leadership, leadership is a group process: by increasing the perception of a shared identity, a leader may increase satisfaction and commitment among the members of the group. We argue that an identity leader will promote better organisational commitment through increased participation in decision-making and a greater shared identity. We conducted an online survey across nine countries (N= 696) to examine the relationship between identity leadership and organisational commitment. The results of our cross-cultural correlational study show that the relationship between identity leadership and organisational commitment is partially mediated by participation in decision-making and team identification. The model is generalisable across individualistic and collectivistic countries.



Ceren Aydın (Cultural Studies MA)

Cultural Studies MA student Ceren Aydın attended “Intersex Social Sciences: Activism, Human Rights, and Citizenship” conference organized by University of Huddersfield on 4-5 June, 2018. Ceren presented her paper entitled “Rethinking Medical Discourse through Intersex Experiences.”


By  bringing  together  experiences  of  intersex  individuals  and  dominant  medical  narratives  in contemporary Turkey, this paper raises questions regarding how the human rights of individuals with  intersex  conditions  can  be  improved.  Based  on  the  data  collected  through  in-depth interviews  with  intersex  individuals  and  with  clinicians  who  take  part  in  their  treatment procedures, the paper span4 provides an analysis of implications of medicalization of intersex both on discursive and practical levels; it looks at the kinds of the discourses medicalization enables or suppresses  and  how the  dominant  medical  discourses  around  intersex  intersect  with  broader cultural and political discourses, especially in relation to body, gender and sexuality, justifying medical  practices  that  violate  the  rights of  patients to  informed  consent  and bodily  integrity. Secondly,  it  expands  upon  medical  experiences  of  intersex  individuals  and  shows  how  these experiences  can  provide  insight  into  the  ways  in  which  intersexuality  and  health  can  be rethought.




İsmail Noyan (History MA)

History MA student İsmail Noyan was invited to the General Conference of European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) held in 22-25 August 2018, Hamburg. He presented his paper entitled “The Three Dimensions For Understanding the Conservative Attitude Toward Change: nature of change, nature of challenge and nature of current constraints” and also served as the discussant of Ewan Burns paper named “Foundationalist Conservatism.” You can find the abstract of Noyan’s paper below.


Arguably, the key to understand conservatism is an understanding of the conservative attitude toward change. Although it is mostly acknowledged that the conservative appears to vacillate between accepting and rejecting change, further research is needed to have a better understanding of the conservative attitude toward change. To this end, I propose three-dimensional framework. The span4 dimension, nature of change enables us to understand roughly outlined picture of what sorts of changes are acceptable for conservatives. The second dimension, nature of challenge focuses on historical context and intellectual environment within which the conservative accepts/rejects change. These two dimensions are incorporated into the literature on conservatism, but the third dimension, nature of current constraints (which I think to be crucial to understand conservative mind) is hardly mentioned.  Nature of current constraints refers to limitations and/or requirements of time, and the way in which and by whom current institutions, ideas and conditions come into existence. I argue that the conservative accepts change that would not have been acceptable otherwise because of the necessities of time. Furthermore, owing the fact that the conservative values existing conditions, institutions and ideas not because they happen to be there but because they stand the test of time and carry and transfer the knowledge and experience accepting  ‘revolutionary’ change --if the current is not the result of such an organic process-- is not contradictory at all.