Search results

This paper presents a co-authorship study of authors who published in Digital Humanities journals and examines the apparent influence of gender, or more specifically, the quantitatively detectable influence of gender in the networks they form.

This study applied co-authorship network analysis. Data has been collected from three canonical Digital Humanities journals over 52 years (1966–2017) and analysed.

The results are presented as visualised networks and suggest that female scholars in Digital Humanities play more central roles and act as the main bridges of collaborative networks even though overall female authors are fewer in number than male authors in the network.

This is the first co-authorship network study in Digital Humanities to examine the role that gender appears to play in these co-authorship networks using statistical analysis and visualisation.

Advancements in Internet technologies greatly influence digital humanities, yet research investigating web3 (i.e. the blockchain-based, decentralised web) within that domain remains limited. The purpose of this paper is to address that gap, presenting a state-of-the-art synthesis of web3-related technologies for digital humanities infrastructures and exploring associated risks and challenges.

Following a review of the literature, the authors scope out ways blockchain technology, peer-to-peer decentralised storage and other web3 technologies could support digital humanities infrastructures, especially in the context of digital cultural heritage. In this discussion, particular cognisance is given to the needs and aims of the UK’s Arts and Humanities Research Council funded Towards a National Collection programme, which seeks to break down the barriers that exist between the UK’s cultural heritage collections.

Web3 introduces novel tools and processes that could benefit digital humanities infrastructures, enabling decentralisation and facilitating open access data storage. Yet, significant barriers to adoption remain, such as the requirement for highly specialised technical expertise. Risks and challenges must also be considered prior to any use, including legal, ethical and technical safeguards.

This study explores opportunities and risks of web3 for digital humanities, through the lens of digital cultural heritage infrastructures and their requirements, including decentralised storage and persistent identification. It does not provide a holistic overview of all web3 technologies.

The authors identify practical uses of web3 technologies for digital humanities projects, outlining potential applications concerning decentralised storage and persistent identification.

The authors push forward current knowledge and literature on the intersection of web3 and digital humanities, outlining also practical recommendations for scholars, practitioners and funding organisations.

This paper aims to explore the accelerations and constraints libraries, archives, museums and heritage organisations (“collections-holding organisations”) face in their role as collection data providers for digital infrastructures. To date, digital infrastructures operate within the cultural heritage domain typically as data aggregation platforms, such as Europeana or Art UK.

Semi-structured interviews with 18 individuals in 8 UK collections-holding organisations and 2 international aggregators.

Discussions about digital infrastructure development often lay great emphasis on questions and problems that are technical and legal in nature. As important as technical and legal matters are, more latent, yet potent challenges exist too. Though less discussed in the literature, collections-holding organisations' capacity to participate in digital infrastructures is dependent on a complex interplay of funding allocation across the sector, divergent traditions of collection description and disciplinaries’ idiosyncrasies. Accordingly, we call for better social-cultural and trans-sectoral (collections-holding organisations, universities and technological providers) understandings of collection data infrastructure development.

The authors recommend developing more understanding of the social-cultural aspects (e.g. disciplinary conventions) and their impact on collection data dissemination. More studies on the impact and opportunities of unified collections for different audiences and collections-holding organisations themselves are required too.

Sustainable financial investment across the heritage sector is required to address the discrepancies between different organisation types in their capacity to deliver collection data. Smaller organisations play a vital role in diversifying the (digital) historical canon, but they often struggle to digitise collections and bring catalogues online in the first place. In addition, investment in existing infrastructures for collection data dissemination and unification is necessary, instead of creating new platforms, with various levels of uptake and longevity. Ongoing investments in collections curation and high-quality cataloguing are prerequisites for a sustainable heritage sector and collection data infrastructures. Investments in the sustainability of infrastructures are not a replacement for research and vice versa.

The authors recommend establishing networks where collections-holding organisations, technology providers and users can communicate their experiences and needs in an ongoing way and influence policy.

To date, the research focus on developing collection data infrastructures has tended to be on the drive to adopt specific technological solutions and copyright licensing practices. This paper offers a critical and holistic analysis of the dispersed experience of collections-holding organisations in their role as data providers for digital infrastructures. The paper contributes to the emerging understanding of the latent factors that make infrastructural endeavours in the heritage sector complex undertakings.

This paper presents a follow-on study that quantifies geolingual markers and their apparent connection with authorship collaboration patterns in canonical Digital Humanities (DH) journals. In particular, it seeks to detect patterns in authors' countries of work and languages in co-authorship networks.

Through an in-depth co-authorship network analysis, this study analysed bibliometric data from three canonical DH journals over a range of 52 years (1966–2017). The results are presented as visualised networks with centrality calculations.

The results suggest that while DH scholars may not collaborate as frequently as those in other disciplines, when they do so their collaborations tend to be more international than in many Science and Engineering, and Social Sciences disciplines. DH authors in some countries (e.g. Spain, Finland, Australia, Canada, and the UK) have the highest international co-author rates, while others have high national co-author rates but low international rates (e.g. Japan, the USA, and France).

This study is the first DH co-authorship network study that explores the apparent connection between language and collaboration patterns in DH. It contributes to ongoing debates about diversity, representation, and multilingualism in DH and academic publishing more widely.

By mapping-out the capabilities, challenges and limitations of named-entity recognition (NER), this article aims to synthesise the state of the art of NER in the context of the early modern research field and to inform discussions about the kind of resources, methods and directions that may be pursued to enrich the application of the technique going forward.

Through an extensive literature review, this article maps out the current capabilities, challenges and limitations of NER and establishes the state of the art of the technique in the context of the early modern, digitally augmented research field. It also presents a new case study of NER research undertaken by Enlightenment Architectures: Sir Hans Sloane's Catalogues of his Collections (2016–2021), a Leverhulme funded research project and collaboration between the British Museum and University College London, with contributing expertise from the British Library and the Natural History Museum.

Currently, it is not possible to benchmark the capabilities of NER as applied to documents of the early modern period. The authors also draw attention to the situated nature of authority files, and current conceptualisations of NER, leading them to the conclusion that more robust reporting and critical analysis of NER approaches and findings is required.

This article examines NER as applied to early modern textual sources, which are mostly studied by Humanists. As addressed in this article, detailed reporting of NER processes and outcomes is not necessarily valued by the disciplines of the Humanities, with the result that it can be difficult to locate relevant data and metrics in project outputs. The authors have tried to mitigate this by contacting projects discussed in this paper directly, to further verify the details they report here.

The authors suggest that a forum is needed where tools are evaluated according to community standards. Within the wider NER community, the MUC and ConLL corpora are used for such experimental set-ups and are accompanied by a conference series, and may be seen as a useful model for this. The ultimate nature of such a forum must be discussed with the whole research community of the early modern domain.

NER is an algorithmic intervention that transforms data according to certain rules-, patterns- or training data and ultimately affects how the authors interpret the results. The creation, use and promotion of algorithmic technologies like NER is not a neutral process, and neither is their output A more critical understanding of the role and impact of NER on early modern documents and research and focalization of some of the data- and human-centric aspects of NER routines that are currently overlooked are called for in this paper.

This article presents a state of the art snapshot of NER, its applications and potential, in the context of early modern research. It also seeks to inform discussions about the kinds of resources, methods and directions that may be pursued to enrich the application of NER going forward. It draws attention to the situated nature of authority files, and current conceptualisations of NER, and concludes that more robust reporting of NER approaches and findings are urgently required. The Appendix sets out a comprehensive summary of digital tools and resources surveyed in this article.

This paper aims to make a contribution to the ongoing debates about the nature, value and potential of closer collaboration between digital humanities (DH) and the library sector by identifying and contextualising the types of new knowledge that were created through such a collaboration on the London School of Economics’s Webbs on the Web project.

A qualitative approach comprising a literature review, a case study of Webbs on the Web, a summary and analysis of the results of user testing and a critical analysis of the collaboration itself.

A deeper understanding of the complementary skills of library professionals and DH researchers and how they may best be utilised in digital library development will lead, ceteris paribus, to richer and more fit-for-purpose digital scholarly resources. This is exemplified by Webbs on the Web, where the unique but complementary perspectives that such groups brought to user testing enhanced the usability of the resource for a wide range of audiences. Furthermore, the kinds of collaborations that characterised this project reflect broader changes in academic communities and digital library development, and a host of mutually beneficial outcomes can be pursued as a result of such changes.

We demonstrate the benefits that can flow from breaking down boundaries and hierarchies between the academic library professional and DH researcher. We advance the current literature by providing concrete examples of practice; much of the current literature tends to be more abstract in nature.

This study aims to update and extend previous efforts gauging the status of the quickly evolving field of digital humanities (DH). Based on a sample of directly relevant DH literature during 2005–2020 from Web of Science, the study conducts a longitudinal examination of the research output, intellectual structures and contributors.

The study applies bibliometric methods, social network analysis and visualization tools to conduct a longitudinal examination.

The research output and scope of DH topics has grown over time with a widening and deepening field in four major development stages. Through both term frequency and term co-occurrence relationship networks, this study further identifies four major reoccurring topics and themes of DH research: (1) collections and contents; (2) technologies, techniques, theories and methods; (3) collaboration, interdisciplinarity and support and (4) DH evolution. Finally, leading DH research contributors (authors, institutions and nations) are also identified.

This study utilizes a greater number of and richer subject sources than previous efforts to identify the overall intellectual structures of DH research based on key terms from titles, abstracts and author keywords. It expands on previous efforts and furthers our understanding of DH research with more recent DH literature and richer subject sources from the literature.