Reinventing Research? Information Practices in the Humanities

Monica Bulger, E. Meyer, Grace de la Flor, Melissa Mhairi Terras, S. Wyatt, M. Jirotka, Kathryn Eccles, Christine McCarthy Madsen
{"title":"Reinventing Research? Information Practices in the Humanities","authors":"Monica Bulger, E. Meyer, Grace de la Flor, Melissa Mhairi Terras, S. Wyatt, M. Jirotka, Kathryn Eccles, Christine McCarthy Madsen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1859267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Researchers in the humanities adopt a wide variety of approaches to their research. Their work tends to focus on texts and images, but they use and also create a wide range of information resources, in print, manuscript and digital forms. Like other researchers, they face multiple demands on their time, and so they find the ease and speed of access to digital resources very attractive: some of them note that they are reluctant on occasion to consult texts that require a trip to a distant library or archive. Nevertheless, none of the participants in our study is yet ready to abandon print and manuscript resources in favour of digital ones. Rather, they engage with a range of resources and technologies, moving seamlessly between them. Such behaviours are likely to persist for some time.This is reflected also in how researchers disseminate their research. The overwhelmingly dominant channels are the long-established ones such as journal articles, conferences and workshops, monographs and book chapters. We found only limited use – except among philosophers - of blogs and other social media. We noted the doubts expressed in other fields about quality assurance for users of such media, but also concerns about how best to present material that will be read by non-academic audiences.A key change in humanities research over the past 10-15 years has been the growth of more formal and systematic collaboration between researchers. This is a response in part to new funding opportunities, but also to the possibilities opened up by new technology. Over recent years there has also been a shift from the model under which technology specialists tell researchers how to do their research to more constructive engagement. Like other researchers, scholars in the humanities use what works for them, finding technologies and resources that fit their research, and resisting any pressure to use something just because it is new.But there is little evidence as yet of their taking full advantage of the possibilities of more advanced tools for text-mining, grid or cloud computing, or the semantic web; and only limited uptake of even simple, freely-available tools for data management and sharing. Rather, they manage and store information on their desktops and laptops, and share it with others via email. Barriers to the adoption and take up of new technologies and services include lack of awareness and of institutional training and support, but also lack of standardization and inconsistencies in quality and functionality across different resources. These make for delays in research, repetitive searching, and limitations on researchers’ ability to draw connections and relationships between different resources.","PeriodicalId":153695,"journal":{"name":"Cognition in Mathematics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"67","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition in Mathematics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1859267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 67

Abstract

Researchers in the humanities adopt a wide variety of approaches to their research. Their work tends to focus on texts and images, but they use and also create a wide range of information resources, in print, manuscript and digital forms. Like other researchers, they face multiple demands on their time, and so they find the ease and speed of access to digital resources very attractive: some of them note that they are reluctant on occasion to consult texts that require a trip to a distant library or archive. Nevertheless, none of the participants in our study is yet ready to abandon print and manuscript resources in favour of digital ones. Rather, they engage with a range of resources and technologies, moving seamlessly between them. Such behaviours are likely to persist for some time.This is reflected also in how researchers disseminate their research. The overwhelmingly dominant channels are the long-established ones such as journal articles, conferences and workshops, monographs and book chapters. We found only limited use – except among philosophers - of blogs and other social media. We noted the doubts expressed in other fields about quality assurance for users of such media, but also concerns about how best to present material that will be read by non-academic audiences.A key change in humanities research over the past 10-15 years has been the growth of more formal and systematic collaboration between researchers. This is a response in part to new funding opportunities, but also to the possibilities opened up by new technology. Over recent years there has also been a shift from the model under which technology specialists tell researchers how to do their research to more constructive engagement. Like other researchers, scholars in the humanities use what works for them, finding technologies and resources that fit their research, and resisting any pressure to use something just because it is new.But there is little evidence as yet of their taking full advantage of the possibilities of more advanced tools for text-mining, grid or cloud computing, or the semantic web; and only limited uptake of even simple, freely-available tools for data management and sharing. Rather, they manage and store information on their desktops and laptops, and share it with others via email. Barriers to the adoption and take up of new technologies and services include lack of awareness and of institutional training and support, but also lack of standardization and inconsistencies in quality and functionality across different resources. These make for delays in research, repetitive searching, and limitations on researchers’ ability to draw connections and relationships between different resources.
重塑的研究呢?人文学科的信息实践
人文学科的研究人员采用各种各样的研究方法。他们的工作往往侧重于文本和图像,但他们也使用并创造了广泛的信息资源,包括印刷、手稿和数字形式。像其他研究人员一样,他们也面临着时间上的多重需求,因此他们发现获取数字资源的便利性和速度非常有吸引力:他们中的一些人注意到,他们有时不愿意去远处的图书馆或档案馆查阅文本。然而,在我们的研究中,没有一个参与者准备放弃印刷和手稿资源,转而使用数字资源。相反,他们使用一系列资源和技术,在它们之间无缝地移动。这种行为可能会持续一段时间。这也反映在研究人员如何传播他们的研究上。压倒性的主导渠道是那些历史悠久的渠道,如期刊文章、会议和研讨会、专著和书籍章节。除了哲学家之外,我们发现博客和其他社交媒体的使用非常有限。我们注意到其他领域对此类媒体用户的质量保证表示怀疑,但也关注如何最好地呈现非学术受众阅读的材料。在过去的10-15年里,人文学科研究的一个关键变化是研究人员之间更加正式和系统的合作的增长。这在一定程度上是对新的融资机会的回应,但也是对新技术带来的可能性的回应。近年来,技术专家告诉研究人员如何进行研究的模式也发生了转变,转向了更具建设性的参与。像其他研究人员一样,人文学科的学者使用对他们有用的东西,寻找适合他们研究的技术和资源,并抵制任何仅仅因为新东西就使用它的压力。但目前还没有证据表明他们充分利用了文本挖掘、网格或云计算或语义网等更先进工具的可能性;即使是简单的、免费的数据管理和共享工具,也只能有限地使用。相反,他们在台式电脑和笔记本电脑上管理和存储信息,并通过电子邮件与他人分享。采用和利用新技术和服务的障碍包括缺乏认识和机构培训和支持,但也包括缺乏标准化和不同资源之间的质量和功能不一致。这导致了研究的延迟,重复搜索,以及限制了研究人员在不同资源之间建立联系和关系的能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信