Theory-Driven Statistics for the Digital Humanities: Presenting Pitfalls and a Practical Guide by the Example of the Reformation

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Ramona Roller
{"title":"Theory-Driven Statistics for the Digital Humanities: Presenting Pitfalls and a Practical Guide by the Example of the Reformation","authors":"Ramona Roller","doi":"10.22148/001c.57764","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Digital Humanities face the problem of multiple hypothesis testing: Evermore hypotheses are tested until a desired pattern has been found. This practice is prone to mistaking random patterns for real ones. Instead, we should reduce the number of hypothesis tests to only test meaningful ones. We address this problem by using theory to generate hypotheses for statistical models. We illustrate our approach with the example of the European Reformation, where we test a theory on the role of opinion leaders for the adoption of Protestantism with a logistic regression model. Given our specific setting, including choice of data and operationalisation of variables, we do not find enough evidence to claim that opinion leaders contributed via personal visits and letters to the adoption of Protestantism. To falsify or to support a theory, it has to be tested in different settings. Our presented approach helps the Digital Humanities bridge the gap between the qualitative and quantitative camp, advance understanding of structures resulting from human activity, and increase scientific credibility.","PeriodicalId":33005,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cultural Analytics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22148/001c.57764","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Digital Humanities face the problem of multiple hypothesis testing: Evermore hypotheses are tested until a desired pattern has been found. This practice is prone to mistaking random patterns for real ones. Instead, we should reduce the number of hypothesis tests to only test meaningful ones. We address this problem by using theory to generate hypotheses for statistical models. We illustrate our approach with the example of the European Reformation, where we test a theory on the role of opinion leaders for the adoption of Protestantism with a logistic regression model. Given our specific setting, including choice of data and operationalisation of variables, we do not find enough evidence to claim that opinion leaders contributed via personal visits and letters to the adoption of Protestantism. To falsify or to support a theory, it has to be tested in different settings. Our presented approach helps the Digital Humanities bridge the gap between the qualitative and quantitative camp, advance understanding of structures resulting from human activity, and increase scientific credibility.
数字人文学科的理论统计:以改革为例的陷阱与实践指南
数字人文面临着多重假设检验的问题:对越来越多的假设进行检验,直到找到所需的模式。这种做法容易将随机模式误认为真实模式。相反,我们应该减少假设检验的数量,只检验有意义的假设检验。我们通过使用理论为统计模型生成假设来解决这个问题。我们以欧洲宗教改革为例说明了我们的方法,在那里,我们用逻辑回归模型检验了一个关于意见领袖在采用新教方面的作用的理论。考虑到我们的具体环境,包括数据的选择和变量的操作,我们没有找到足够的证据来声称意见领袖通过私人访问和信件为新教的采用做出了贡献。为了证伪或支持一个理论,必须在不同的环境中进行测试。我们提出的方法有助于数字人文弥合定性和定量阵营之间的差距,促进对人类活动产生的结构的理解,并提高科学可信度。
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
Journal of Cultural Analytics
Journal of Cultural Analytics Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信