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

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/ Why are non-data driven representations of data-driven research in the humanities so bad? - OpenMethods 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)
  • Click to share on Google+ (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



    Search in Isidore

    Categories

    Recent Posts

    • Standardization Survival Kit – Create a dictionary in TEI
    • Towards Scientific Workflows and Computer Simulation as a Method in Digital Humanities – Digitale Bibliothek – Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.
    • Not All Character N-grams Are Created Equal: A Study in Authorship Attribution – ACL Anthology
    • It’s personal, isn’t it? What personalization means for internet research methods – AoIR
    • Forschungsdaten in der (digitalen) Geschichtswissenschaft. Warum sie wichtig sind und wir gemeinsame Standards brauchen – Digitale Geschichtswissenschaft

    Archives

    In cooperation with

    OPERAS
    TERESAH (Tools E-Registry for E-Social science, Arts and Humanities) is a cross-community tools knowledge registry aimed at researchers in the Social Sciences and Humanities.
    It aims to provide an authoritative listing of the software tools currently in use in those domains, and to allow their users to make transparent the methods and applications behind them.

    Meta

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • 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 ⋅ Powered by WordPress