@article{das_samandar_autry_rouphail_2023, title={Surrogate Safety Measures: Review and Assessment in Real-World Mixed Traditional and Autonomous Vehicle Platoons}, volume={11}, ISSN={["2169-3536"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3248628}, DOI={10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3248628}, abstractNote={Surrogate safety measures (SSMs) are critical tools for evaluating the safety performance of mixed traffic. Crashes are rare events, and historical crash data are scarce for mixed traffic that includes autonomous and/ or connected vehicles. Recent safety review papers focus on traditional human-driven vehicles (TVs) and do not encompass advanced technology vehicles such as autonomous vehicles (AVs), connected vehicles (CVs), and connected-autonomous vehicles (CAVs). This study examines the development, implementation, and shortcomings of SSMs and SSM-based models used for mixed traffic safety evaluation. We review the current relevant literature and apply a case study analysis using a real-world mixed traffic dataset. The study summarizes the fundamental SSM guiding concepts, as well as their most significant metrics including threshold values employed in the past for SSMs and SSM-based models. Primary benefits and limitations of examined SSMs and SSM-based models are also underlined. This review reveals significant gaps in the literature that might guide future research paths in SSM-based mixed traffic safety assessment. Critical gaps include the absence of robust SSM threshold selection criteria, the suitability of current SSMs in mixed traffic research, microsimulation modeling that lacks proper calibration and validation, and the absence of a framework for selecting or combining multiple SSMs.}, journal={IEEE ACCESS}, author={Das, Tanmay and Samandar, M. Shoaib and Autry, Meagan Kittle and Rouphail, Nagui M.}, year={2023}, pages={32682–32696} }
 @article{mehlenbacher_kelly_kampe_kittle autry_2016, title={Instructional Design for Online Learning Environments and the Problem of Collaboration in the Cloud}, volume={48}, ISSN={0047-2816 1541-3780}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0047281616679112}, DOI={10.1177/0047281616679112}, abstractNote={To investigate how college students understand and use cloud technology for collaborative writing, the authors studied two asynchronous online courses, on science communication and on technical communication. Students worked on a group assignment (3–4 per group) using Google Docs and individually reflected on their experience writing collaboratively. This article explores leadership and how it interacts with team knowledge making and the collaborative writing process. Guidelines are outlined for instructors interested in adopting collaborative, cloud-based assignments, and the tension between providing clear instructional guidance for student teams and allowing teams to embrace the ambiguity and messiness of virtual collaboration are discussed.}, number={2}, journal={Journal of Technical Writing and Communication}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Mehlenbacher, Brad and Kelly, Ashley Rose and Kampe, Christopher and Kittle Autry, Meagan}, year={2016}, month={Nov}, pages={199–221} }
 @inbook{kinsella_kelly_kittle autry_2015, place={Turtle Island}, title={Articulating resistance to nuclear power: Local tactics and strategic connections in a nuclear construction financing controversy}, booktitle={Communication for the Commons Revisiting Participation and Environment}, publisher={International Environmental Communication Association}, author={Kinsella, W.J. and Kelly, A.R. and Kittle Autry, M.}, editor={Meisner, M.S. and Sriskandarajah, N. and Depoe, S.P.Editors}, year={2015}, pages={332–345} }
 @article{mehlenbacher_autry_kelly_2015, title={Instructional Design for Stem-Based Collaborative, Colocated Classroom Composition}, volume={58}, ISSN={0361-1434 1558-1500}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tpc.2016.2517538}, DOI={10.1109/tpc.2016.2517538}, abstractNote={Research problem: Our study focuses on how students collaborate online to produce specific written genres, using particular collaborative technologies to work together productively, and how instructor feedback and student perspectives on collaborative work influence those activities in online classrooms. Research questions: When composing using collaborative web-based writing applications, do students focus primarily on the interface or the text space? What kinds of expectations about collaborative writing do students bring to the interface and text space? To what extent can we characterize students' acknowledgement of a third space, what we have identified as “communicative interaction?” Literature review: Workplace collaboration is important because organizations increasingly demand effective collaborators, team members, and team leaders, and technologies for sharing, cobuilding, and feedback are readily available to support these activities. Student preparation for workplace collaboration is important because students struggle when they are asked to write together, particularly when the collaborative process involves new technologies, and yet knowledge of collaborative writing strategies and experience with collaborative technologies, such as Google Docs, are the very competencies that organizations expect of them. Methodology: Thirteen groups of 3 to 4 technical writing students and science communication students enrolled in online professional writing courses at a major research university wrote feature specifications and reports on the globalization of the sciences, respectively, using Google Docs within Google Drive. Sixteen of 37 students responded to a set of questions asking them to reflect on their experiences working collaboratively, learning new genres, using the collaborative environment, and revising with instructor feedback. Results and conclusions: We found that students struggled most with adapting their already established collaborative strategies grounded in face-to-face learning situations to an online learning environment, where they felt their means of communication and expression were limited. The results suggest that effective collaborative experiences, properly executed, represent a repertoire of competencies that go well beyond only technical considerations, such as being able to effectively assign roles, set milestones, and navigate the numerous tasks and processes of writing as a team. The small number of students and the single instructor with her own particular feedback style limit the study. Future research includes looking at how different feedback styles influence student collaborative writing.}, number={4}, journal={IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication}, publisher={Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)}, author={Mehlenbacher, Brad and Autry, Meagan Kittle and Kelly, Ashley Rose}, year={2015}, month={Dec}, pages={396–409} }
 @article{kittle autry_carter_2015, title={Unblocking occluded genres in graduate writing: Thesis and Dissertation Support Services at NC State University}, volume={31}, url={http://compositionforum.com/issue/31/north-carolina-state.php}, note={Available online at}, journal={Composition Forum}, author={Kittle Autry, M. and Carter, M.}, year={2015}, month={Apr} }
 @inbook{kelly_kittle autry_mehlenbacher_2014, place={Hershey, PA}, title={The temporality of Twitter: Considering Chronos and Kairos for digital rhetoric}, booktitle={Digital Rhetoric and Global Literacies: Communication Modes and Digital Practices in the Networked World}, publisher={IGI Global}, author={Kelly, A.R. and Kittle Autry, M. and Mehlenbacher, B.}, editor={Verhulsdonck, G. and Limbu, M.Editors}, year={2014}, pages={227–247} }
 @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={Public voices and energy choices: Citizens speak out at the North Carolina Utilities Commission}, volume={8}, number={5}, journal={Communication Currents}, author={Kinsella, W.J. and Kelly, A.R. and Kittle Autry, M.}, 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} }
 @book{kittle autry_kelly_2012, title={Computers & Writing 2012, ArchiTEXTure}, volume={14}, url={https://www.enculturation.net/14}, journal={Enculturation: A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture}, year={2012} }
 @article{kittle autry_kelly_2012, title={Introduction to the Special Issue: Computers & Writing 2012, ArchiTEXTure}, volume={14}, url={http://enculturation.net/architexture-introduction}, journal={Enculturation: A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture}, author={Kittle Autry, Meagan and Kelly, Ashley Rose}, year={2012} }
 @article{autry_kelly_2012, title={Merging Duke Energy and Progress Energy: Online Public Discourse, Post-Fukushima Reactions, and the Absence of Environmental Communication}, volume={6}, ISSN={1752-4032 1752-4040}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2012.672444}, DOI={10.1080/17524032.2012.672444}, abstractNote={This article examines online discourse in 2011 surrounding the proposed Duke Energy and Progress Energy merger in the Carolinas. It explores how issues pertaining to the merger, including constructing new nuclear plants, are discussed in media coverage and by citizens using social media. Overall, we find that the merger discourse focuses on economic concerns rather than the environmental concerns we had anticipated. However, post-Fukushima discourse appears to have become more inclusive of environmental concerns. We conclude that environmental discussions and efforts are likely to be globally informed andlocally situated, discussing the implications for environmental communication research exploring online discourses, specifically through social media. Future research must address how to locate and delineate constellations of locally situated discourse to provide a clearer picture of environmentally focused social media communication.}, number={2}, journal={Environmental Communication}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Autry, Meagan Kittle and Kelly, Ashley R.}, year={2012}, month={Apr}, pages={278–284} }
 @inproceedings{kelly_kittle autry_2011, title={A humanistic approach to the study of social media}, ISBN={9781450309363}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2038476.2038525}, DOI={10.1145/2038476.2038525}, abstractNote={Humanistic research into social media is presently diverse in approach, but rich in theoretical underpinnings. It is unsurprising that there is some difficulty in translating often text-based approaches to multi-media rich, rapidly-evolving social networking environments. We explore theoretical issues for studying social media with respect to one popular research methodology: case study research (CSR). Here we examine the challenges that social media pose to CSR in the humanities and then advance an approach using social network analysis (SNA) to assist in selecting case studies. This approach, we argue, improves selection of case studies by considering the network structures of social media.}, booktitle={Proceedings of the 29th ACM international conference on Design of communication - SIGDOC '11}, publisher={ACM Press}, author={Kelly, Ashley Rose and Kittle Autry, Meagan}, year={2011} }
 @inbook{kittle_2010, place={New York}, title={Review of America, America}, booktitle={Encyclopedia of Contemporary American Writers and Their Work}, publisher={FactFinder}, author={Kittle, M.}, editor={Hamilton, G.Editor}, year={2010} }