Category: Digital Humanities

In recent years, research funders across the world have implemented mandates for research data management (RDM) that introduce new obligations for researchers seeking funding. Although data work is not new in the humanities, digital research infrastructures, best practices, and the development of highly qualified personnel to support humanist researchers are all still nascent. Responding to these changes, this article offers four contributions to how humanists can consider the role of "data" in their research and succeed in its management. First, we define RDM and data management plans (DMP) and raise some exigent questions regarding their development and maintenance. Second, acknowledging the unsettled status of "data" in the humanities, we offer some conceptual explanations of what data are, and gesture to some ways in which humanists are already (and have always been) engaged in data work. Third, we argue that data work requires conscious design—attention to how data are produced—and that thinking of data work as involving design (e.g., experimental and interpretive work) can help humanists engage more fruitfully in RDM. Fourth, we argue that RDM (and data work, generally) is labour that requires compensation in the form of funding, support, and tools, as well as accreditation and recognition that incentivizes researchers to make RDM an integral part of their research. Finally, we offer a set of concrete recommendations to support humanist RDM in the Canadian context.

https://doi.org/10.16995/dscn.9956

| Artificial Intelligence |
| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

Chapter one gives an overview of the European and national policy environment which has given rise to research data management and sharing mandates, as well as the institutional support structures around them. In chapter two, which is dedicated to implementation and everyday practice, the authors of this publication share how their institutions have developed capacities to accommodate data support professions, and also share their own career paths leading to such roles. After the first two chapters have set the stage and recounted the authors’ reflections on these new roles, the rest of the publication highlights and discusses some of the key domain-specificities of research data management in the Arts and Humanities. Chapter 3.1 reflects on the implications of the lack of consensus around the notion of data within the Arts and Humanities domain through a case study of digital critical editions. Chapter 3.2 addresses the challenges around the, essentially, multilingual character of arts and humanities data, with special focus on multilingual vocabularies and thesauri. Chapter 3.3 provides support for research scenarios where open data sharing is either impossible or is difficult due to legal and ethical limitations, and navigates the complexities of intellectual property and the application of regulatory frameworks, including restrictions on text and data mining, and authentication and authorisation in an open world. Clearly, the discourse on data sharing cannot be complete without discussing the current limitations within research assessment and rewards criteria, nor highlighting initiatives which aim to incentivise and reward data sharing in the working/professional contexts of the Working Group’s members. A discussion on rewards can be found in Chapter 3.4. Chapter 3.5 addresses one of the most widely shared data management challenges within the domain and brings together use cases concerning successful collaborations between cultural heritage institutions and arts and humanities research teams. Finally, Chapter 3.6 showcases good practices in long-term archiving

https://tinyurl.com/ycxbrh33

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

This paper explores the landscape of research data in the humanities in the European context, delving into their diversity and the challenges of defining and sharing them. It investigates three aspects: the types of data in the humanities, their representation in repositories, and their alignment with the FAIR principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable). By reviewing datasets in repositories, this research determines the dominant data types, their openness, licensing, and compliance with the FAIR principles. This research provides important insight into the heterogeneous nature of humanities data, their representation in the repository, and their alignment with FAIR principles, highlighting the need for improved accessibility and reusability to improve the overall quality and utility of humanities research data.

https://doi.org/10.3390/publications12010006

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

One of the main goals of Open Science is to make research more reproducible. There is no consensus, however, on what exactly "reproducibility" is, as opposed for example to "replicability", and how it applies to different research fields. After a short review of the literature on reproducibility/replicability with a focus on the humanities, we describe how the creation of the digital twin of the temporary exhibition "The Other Renaissance" has been documented throughout, with different methods, but with constant attention to research transparency, openness and accountability. A careful documentation of the study design, data collection and analysis techniques helps reflect and make all possible influencing factors explicit, and is a fundamental tool for reliability and rigour and for opening the "black box" of research.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.12000

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

To get a sense of trends in data sharing within the humanities, we conducted semi-structured interviews with key personnel at several humanities projects with strong data components. The interviews focused on identifying where and how they planned to share their research data, how they imagined it might be used by others, and their perspective on barriers and opportunities to data sharing in the humanities. The research agendas, skills, and perspectives of the people we spoke with are not representative of most humanities-oriented research. However, the interviews provide important insight into the thinking of humanists who are already working across the cultural divide around data that separate the humanities from most other academic disciplines. We use them here as a springboard for consideration of what humanities data is, how to access and preserve it, and how it fits into the larger goals of creating an open research culture.

https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.318526

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |