Interactivity, Distributed Workflows, and Thick Provenance: A Review of Challenges Confronting Digital Humanities Research Objects

Fenlon, Katrina

doi:10.1109/escience.2019.00067

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Finally, when we asked researchers whether their work is based on a precise and well-recognised methodology, the vast majority replied positively. Although we are a long way away from workflows that are “explicit […] documented and, therefore verifiable” (Edmond, 2019, p. 15), our analysis suggests that researchers might be ready to reflect on how to “characterize humanities workflows” and to “identify how such characterizations can be made useful” (Fenlon, 2019, p. 512).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do we mean by “data”? A proposed classification of data types in the arts and humanities

Gualandi

Pareschi

Peroni

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis article describes the interviews the authors conducted in late 2021 with 19 researchers at the Department of Classical Philology and Italian Studies at the University of Bologna. The main purpose was to shed light on the definition of the word “data” in the humanities domain, as far as FAIR data management practices are concerned, and on what researchers think of the term.Design/methodology/approachThe authors invited one researcher for each of the official disciplinary areas represented within the department and all 19 accepted to participate in the study. Participants were then divided into five main research areas: philology and literary criticism, language and linguistics, history of art, computer science and archival studies. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using a grounded theory approach.FindingsA list of 13 research data types has been compiled thanks to the information collected from participants. The term “data” does not emerge as especially problematic, although a good deal of confusion remains. Looking at current research management practices, methodologies and teamwork appear more central than previously reported.Originality/valueOur findings confirm that “data” within the FAIR framework should include all types of inputs and outputs humanities research work with, including publications. Also, the participants of this study appear ready for a discussion around making their research data FAIR: they do not find the terminology particularly problematic, while they rely on precise and recognised methodologies, as well as on sharing and collaboration with colleagues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%