@book{miller_kelly_2017, place={London}, title={Emerging Genres in New Media Environments}, ISBN={9783319402949 9783319402956}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40295-6}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-319-40295-6}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Miller, Carolyn R. and Kelly, A. R.}, editor={Miller, Carolyn R. and Kelly, Ashley R.Editors}, year={2017} }
 @article{kelly_kittle-autry_2013, title={Access, accommodation, and science: Knowledge in an "open" world}, volume={18}, DOI={10.5210/fm.v18i6.4341}, abstractNote={The rising popularity of open access (OA) publishing in scholarly communities is purportedly leading to increased public knowledge. At least, that’s a key piece of the OA moral argument. This is especially true for discussions of scientific research. We argue, however, that while there have been significant moves to provide better material/technological access to research, OA advocates must still tackle the issue of making original scientific research conceptually accessible. Despite being freely available on the Internet, articles are not also by default linguistically, conceptually, or ideologically accessible to the global public(s) they are intended to reach. In this article, we examine how OA coupled with innovative scientific communication practices can help align the ideals of OA with the realities of complex, specialized genres of writing to provide better, more “open,” access to research. We look to PLOS ONE and the PLOS Blog Network to discuss how the innovative material access of PLOS ONE coupled with the communication strategies of PLOS Bloggers can work together toward more openly accessible original scientific research articles.}, number={6}, journal={First Monday}, author={Kelly, Ashley Rose and Kittle-Autry, Meagan}, year={2013} }
 @article{kinsella_kelly_kittle autry_2013, title={Risk, Regulation, and Rhetorical Boundaries: Claims and Challenges Surrounding a Purported Nuclear Renaissance}, volume={80}, ISSN={0363-7751 1479-5787}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2013.788253}, DOI={10.1080/03637751.2013.788253}, abstractNote={This study examines the efforts of individuals and advocacy groups seeking to influence a state utilities commission's decisions regarding a large corporate merger and a nuclear power construction project. Such local engagements have wider significance as the nuclear industry attempts to expand its role in the global energy economy. Utilizing participatory field work and analysis of public documents, we extend the concept of rhetorical boundary work by examining two challenges faced by opponents of the merger and the nuclear project. First, the utilities commission's regulatory mandate is limited to economic risks rather than environmental, health, and safety risks. Second, expert authority is consistently privileged over local, vernacular arguments. We explore the rhetorical negotiation of these boundaries and the effects produced.}, number={3}, journal={Communication Monographs}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Kinsella, William J. and Kelly, Ashley R. and Kittle Autry, Meagan}, year={2013}, month={Sep}, pages={278–301} }
 @article{kittle autry_kelly_2012, title={Computers and writing 2012 special issue: ArchiTEXTure}, volume={14}, journal={Enculturation: A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture}, author={Kittle Autry, Meagan and Kelly, Ashley Rose}, year={2012} }