OpenMethods

OpenMethods

HIGHLIGHTING DIGITAL HUMANITIES METHODS AND TOOLS

Menu
Skip to content
  • Home
  • About
  • Who we are
    • Editorial Team
    • Volunteer Editors
  • Join us
  • Submit a content
  • RSS feeds
  • Log in
  • Posted on September 20, 2017November 9, 2017
  • by Maciej Maryl

Why are non-data driven representations of data-driven research in the humanities so bad?

https://openmethods.dariah.eu/2017/09/20/why-are-non-data-driven-representations-of-data-driven-research-in-the-humanities-so-bad-txtlab-mcgill/ OpenMethods introduction to: Why are non-data driven representations of data-driven research in the humanities so bad? 2017-09-20 09:21:11 Introduction: This short post captures the problem of inadequate representation of data-driven criticism by scholars who are reluctant to empirical methods. Maciej Maryl https://txtlab.org/2017/09/why-are-non-data-driven-representations-of-data-driven-research-in-the-humanities-so-bad/ Blog post Analysis Collaboration Communicating Community Building Contextualizing Data Digital Humanities Dissemination English Give Overview Interpretation Language Literature Metadata Methods Modeling Projects Publishing Research Research Activities Research Objects Research Process Research Results Text Theorizing Visualization via bookmarklet

Introduction by OpenMethods Editor (Maciej Maryl): This short post captures the problem of inadequate representation of data-driven criticism by scholars who are reluctant to empirical methods.

One of the more frustrating aspects of working in data-driven research today is the representation of such research by people who do not use data. Why? Because it is not subject to the same rules of evidence. If you don’t like data, it turns out you can say whatever you want about people who do use data.

 

Original publication date: 17/09/2017.

Source: Why are non-data driven representations of data-driven research in the humanities so bad? | .txtLAB @ mcgill

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
Posted in Analysis, Collaboration, Communicating, Community Building, Contextualizing, Data, Digital Humanities, Dissemination, English, Give Overview, Interpretation, Language, Languages, Literature, Metadata, Methods, Modeling, Projects, Publishing, Research, Research Activities, Research Objects, Research Process, Research Results, Text, Theorizing, VisualizationTagged via bookmarklet

Post navigation

Prev LinguaKit: uma ferramenta multilingue para a análise linguística e a extração de informação
Next Contextualized Integration of Digital Humanities Research: Using the NeMO Ontology of Digital Humanities Methods

logo_isidoreIsidore suggestions

    Interested in blogging about your research? The Digital Humanities Tools and Methods blog is for you!

    In cooperation with

    OPERAS

    Categories

    Recent Posts

    • OpenMethods Spotlights #2 : Interview with Luise Borek and Canan Hastik about TaDiRAH
    • Programmable Corpora: Introducing DraCor, an Infrastructure for the Research on European Drama
    • Worthäufigkeiten als Quelle für die Geschichtswissenschaft? – Einblicke in die Digital Humanities
    • Fragmentarium: a Model for Digital Fragmentology
    • Offen, vielfältig und kreativ. Ein Bericht zum Barcamp Data Literacy #dhddatcamp20 bei der DHd 2020 | DHd-Blog

    Archives

    Meta

    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org
    © Copyright 2017-2018 – OpenMethods
    Privacy Notice
    Hosted by – We use
    HaS has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 675570
    Bezel Theme by SimpleFreeThemes ⋅ Powered by WordPress