Digital Histories: Emergent Approaches Within the New Digital History 2020
DOI: 10.33134/hup-5-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Digital History 1.5: A Middle Way between Normal and Paradigmatic Digital Historical Research

Abstract: This chapter analyses the impact of digital technology on historical research by identifying some of the critical methodological strands of the new computational digital history using Thomas Kuhn’s research on scientific revolutions. Digital methodologies have been described as posing a potential paradigm shift for historical research. Following Kuhn, the chapter describes the two ideal type responses within history to the challenges of the new computational digital history, where the disruptive digital method… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We have pointed to some of these consequences, but what digital source criticism implies should be further investigated. This termdigital source criticismis beginning to gain traction, especially within digital historiography (e.g., Fridlund 2020;Owens and Padilla 2020;Paju, Oiva, and Fridlund 2020). Within journalism, digital source criticism has been used to describe the application of digital tools to the assessment of digital source material (Grut 2021;Nygren and Brounéus 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have pointed to some of these consequences, but what digital source criticism implies should be further investigated. This termdigital source criticismis beginning to gain traction, especially within digital historiography (e.g., Fridlund 2020;Owens and Padilla 2020;Paju, Oiva, and Fridlund 2020). Within journalism, digital source criticism has been used to describe the application of digital tools to the assessment of digital source material (Grut 2021;Nygren and Brounéus 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However many historians do not know and are unable to access it. Although digital historical sources are more accessible and provide a wider and more dynamic range of sources, it is not uncommon for historians to underestimate it (Fridlund 2020).…”
Section: Solutions For the Effect Of Covid-19 On Historical Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Mats Fridlund notes, there is a tension between digital history 1.0, which designates traditional historical scholarship increasingly impacted by the everyday use of digital tools, and digital history 2.0, which posits computational methods and the increasing abundance of digital sources as profoundly transformative to the discipline at large. 5 A key example of the radically new and different digital history 2.0 is the increasingly common practice of "multidisciplinary teamwork" and the shifts such teamwork entails in terms of the scope of research, the scale of data, the process of data curation and the tools utilized. By contrast, my project rather follows what Fridlund labels as "digital history 1.5", that is "a hybrid or mixed methodology in that it is a combination of quantitative and qualitative historical research methodologies, and semi-automatic as it combines a large amount of manual evaluation with the systematic use of automatic analysis in pre-programmed offline and online calculation".…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%