Highlights for Gibbs and Owens': Writing History in the Digital Age » Hermene... - 0 views

-
historical scholarship increasingly depends on our interactions with data, from battling the hidden algorithms of Google Book Search to text mining a hand-curated set of full-text documents.
-
Even though methods for exploring and interacting with data have begun to permeate historical research, historians’ writing has largely remained mired in traditional forms and conventions
- ...69 more annotations...
-
Examples include discussions of data queries, workflows with particular tools, and the production and interpretation of data visualizations
-
At a minimum, historians need to embrace new priorities for research publications that explicate their process of interfacing with, exploring, and then making sense of historical sources in a fundamentally digital form—that is, the hermeneutics of data.
-
This may mean de-emphasizing narrative in favor of illustrating the rich complexities between an argument and the data that supports it
-
This is especially true in terms of the sheer quantity of data now available that can be gathered in a short time and thus guide humanistic inquiry
-
We must also point out that, while data certainly can be employed as evidence for a historical argument, data are not necessarily evidence in themselves
-
we argue that the creation of, interaction with, and interpretation of data must become more integral to historical writing.
-
Use of data in the humanities has recently attracted considerable attention, and no project more so than Culturomics, a quantitative study of culture using Google Books
-
the nature of data and the way it has been used by historians in the past differs in several important respects from contemporary uses of data
-
This chapter discusses some new ways in which historians might rethink the nature of historical writing as both a product and a process of understanding.
-
As humanists continue to prove that data manipulation and machine learning can confirm existing knowledge, such techniques come closer to telling us something we don’t already know
-
However, even these projects generally focus on research (or research potential) rather than on making their methodology accessible to a broader humanities audience
-
The processes for working with the vast amounts of easily accessible and diverse large sets of data suggest a need for historians to formulate, articulate, and propagate ideas about how data should be approached in historical research
-
For one, it does not refer only to historical analysis via complex statistical methods to create knowledge.
-
Perhaps such a potential dependence on numbers became even more unpalatable to non-numerical historians after an embrace of the cultural turn, the importance of subjectivity
-
Even as data become more readily available and as historians begin to acquire data manipulation skills as part of their training, rigorous mathematics is not necessarily essential for using data efficiently and effectively
-
work with data can be exploratory and deliberately without the mathematical rigor that social scientists must use to support their epistemological claims.
-
To some extent, historians have always collected, analyzed, and written about data. But having access to vastly greater quantities of data, markedly different kinds of datasets, and a variety of complex tools and methodologies for exploring it means that “using” signifies a much broader range of activities than it has previously.
-
knowledge from visualizations as not simply “transferred, revealed, or perceived, but…created through a dynamic process.
-
Data in a variety of forms can provoke new questions and explorations, just as visualizations themselves have been recently described as “generative and iterative, capable of producing new knowledge through the aesthetic provocation
-
using large amounts of data for research should not be considered opposed to more traditional use of historical sources.
-
More often than not, distant reading will involve (if not require) creative and reusable techniques to re-imagine and re-present the past—at least more so than traditional humanist texts do.
-
teven Ramsay has suggested that there is a new kind of role for searching to play in the hermeneutic process of understanding, especially in the value of ‘screwing around’ and embracing the serendipitous discovery that our recent abundance of data makes possibl
-
historical writing has been largely confined by linear narratives, usually in the form of journal articles and monographs
-
easier than ever for historians to combine different kinds of datasets—and thus provide an exciting new way to triangulate historical knowledge
-
The insistence on creating a narrative in static form, even if online, is particularly troubling because it obscures the methods for discovery that underlie the hermeneutic research process.
-
Although relatively simple text searches or charts that aid in our historical analysis are perhaps not worth including in a book
-
While these can present new perspectives on the past, they can only do so to the extent that other historians feel comfortable with the methodologies that are used.
-
It is clear that a new relationship between text and data has begun to unfold.13 This relationship must inform our approach to writing as well as research.
-
We need history writing that interfaces with, explains, and makes accessible the data that historians use
-
the reasons why many historians remain skeptical about data are not all that different from the reasons they can be skeptical about text.
-
We need history writing that will foreground the new historical methods to manipulate text/data coming online, including data queries and manipulation, and the production and interpretation of visualizations.
-
In addition to accelerating research, foregrounding methodology and (access to) data gives rise to a constellation of questions that are becoming increasingly relevant for historians.
-
2) It is instructive as part of teaching and exposing historical research practices; 3) It allows us to keep pace with changing tools and ways of using them.
-
Dave Perry in his blog post “Be Online or Be Irrelevant” suggests that academic blogging can encourage “a digital humanism which takes down those walls and claims a new space for scholarship and public intellectualism.”14 This cannot happen unless our methodologies with data remain transparent.
-
we should embrace more public modes of writing and thinking as a way to challenge the kind of work that scholars do.
-
Perhaps more importantly, this graph does not indicate anything interesting about why the term “user” spiked as it did—the real question that historians want to answer.
-
Historians might well start framing research questions this way, with quick uses of the Ngram viewer or other tools
-
But going beyond the data—making sense of it—can be facilitated by additional expertise in ways that our usually much more naturally circumscribed historical data has generally not required.
-
Owens blogged about this research while it was in progress, describing what he was interested in, how he got his data, how he was working with it, along with a link for others to explore and download the data.
-
These ranged from encouraging the exploration of technical guides, learning from scholarship on the notion of the reader in the context of the history of the book, and suggestions for different prepositions that could further elucidate semantic relationships about “users.”
-
Sharing preliminary representations of data, providing some preliminary interpretations of them, and inviting others to consider how best to make sense of the data at hand, quickly sparked a substantive scholarly conversation
-
this chart is not historical evidence of sufficient (if any) rigor to support historical knowledge claims about what is or isn’t a user.
-
How far, for example, can expressions of data like Google’s Ngram viewer be used in historical work?
-
how does one cite data without black-boxy mathematical reductions, and bring the data itself into the realm of scholarly discourse?
-
How does one show, for example, that references to “sinful” in the nineteenth century appear predominantly in sermon and other exegetical literature in the early part of the century, but become overshadowed by more secular references later in the century? Typically, this would be illustrated with pithy, anecdotal examples taken to be representative of the phenomenon. But does this adequately represent the research methodology? Does it allow anyone to investigate for themselves? Or learn from the methodology?
-
Far better would be to explain the steps used to collect and reformat the data; ideally, the data would be available for download
-
Exposed data allow us to approach interesting questions from multiple and interdisciplinary points of view in the way that citations to textual sources do not
-
As it becomes easier and easier for historians to explore and play with data it becomes essential for us to reflect on how we should incorporate this as part of our research and writing practices.
-
Overall, there has been no aversion to using data in historical research. But historians have started to use data on new scales, and to combine different kinds of data that range widely over typical disciplinary boundaries
-
The ease and increasing presence of data, in terms of both digitized and increasingly born digital research materials, mean that—irrelevant of historical field—the historian faces new methodological challenges.
-
Approaching these materials in a context sensitive way requires substantial amounts of time and energy devoted to how exactly we can interpret data
-
we have argued that historians should deliberately and explicitly share examples of how they are finding and manipulating data in their research with greater methodological transparency in order to promote the spirit of humanistic inquiry and interpretation.
-
Historical data might require little more than simple frequency counts, simple correlations, or reformatting to make it useful to the historian looking for anomalies, trends, or unusual but meaningful coincidences.
-
To argue against the necessity of mathematical complexity is also to suggest that it is a mistake to treat data as self-evident or that data implicitly constitute historical argument or proof.
-
Working with data can be playful and exploratory, and useful techniques should be shared as readily as research discoveries