• Open Access close
• Open Source close
• Research software close
• Other research products close
• Other ORP type close
• DARIAH EU close

In this workshop, we discussed the European legal framework for data privacy and processing personal data (General Data Protection Regulation, GDPR). The workshop helped participants understand how their research is affected by the GDPR and what issues to pay attention to. The workshop began with a general introduction to the topics of data protection and the processing of personal data in the context of research, education and cultural heritage to summarize the pertinent articles of the GDPR. We then moved on to speak about the most common scenarios in which humanities' and social sciences' researchers encounter data protection issues. Examples of this included surveys, interviews and other research activities involving human participants, but also common academic scenarios like communication (mailing- lists, newsletters) and events (e.g. regarding picture and video recordings). Because researchers have to obtain legal consent from their participants in order to comply with the GDPR for many of their activities, the DARIAH working group ELDAH (Ethics and Legality in Digital Arts and Humanities) has developed a tool that provides standardized consent form templates for obtaining legal consent from human participants: The DARIAH ELDAH Consent Form Wizard (CFW). The CFW enables digital scholars and the wider research infrastructure community to quickly and easily obtain a standardized consent form that is legally valid in all of the European Union. The workshop participants were introduced to this tool and got a chance to test it by applying it to their own research practices. They used the tool to download templates to obtain research participants’ consent ; these templates can be adjusted to their specific needs in a few simple steps. Workshop participants had also a chance to give feedback on the CFW: to point out elements that are missing and suggest additional consent scenarios.

These documents contain a number of auxiliary materials for the CHIIR 2020 paper A Workflow Analysis Perspective to Scholarly Research Tasks Marijn Koolen, Sanna Kumpulainen, Liliana Melgar-Estrada Published in: Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (CHIIR '20), March 14--18, 2020, Vancouver, BC, Canada. The paper analyses the workflows of two research projects in the domain of Digital Humanities. The analysis is based on coded interviews for two project collaborators for each project. There are three types of auxiliary materials: Interview guide for interviewing research project collaborators of the two projects analysed in the paper (see pages 2-3 of this PDF). Codebook for coding research activities of the analysed research projects. This is based on the NeDiMAH Methods Ontology (NeMO), extended with a few activities that have no equivalent in NeMO (pages 4-6). Full workflow diagrams of both research projects, RP1 (page 7) and RP2 (page8). Please see the paper for descriptions of the projects. This work is partially funded by CLARIAH, a project on the National Roadmap for Large-Scale Research Facilities of the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) and by Academy of Finland grant number 326616.

Analysen der Computational Literary Studies (CLS) vorverarbeiten ihre Untersuchungsgegenstände typischerweise mit Tools des Natural Language Processing (NLP). Dabei weichen literarische Texte aufgrund ihrer historischen und/oder ästhetischen Eigenart teils eklatant von den Daten ab, auf deren Grundlage die Models der NLP-Tools erstellt wurden, entsprechend sinkt die Accuracy der Tools. Für die CLS könnte die 'Fehlerhaftigkeit' der Tools im Sinne devianzpoetischer Positionen die Möglichkeit bieten, ein computationelles Verständnis vom spezifischen Abweichungscharakter literarischer Texte zu auszubilden. Für den Beitrag haben wir eine Pipeline zur Verarbeitung von Lyrik entwickelt, die potenzielle 'Fehler' von NLP-Tools sammelt und diese 'Fehler' regelbasiert typologisiert. Die Ergebnisse eines ersten Experiments mit dieser Pipeline werden im Beitrag vorgestellt. Damit möchten wir für die CLS auch exemplarisch den Ansatz des "Tool Misuse" profilieren, bei dem die Erzeugung von 'fehlerhaftem' Output computationeller Tools Grundlage für Erkenntnisse über Literatur wird. Ein Beitrag zur 8. Tagung des Verbands "Digital Humanities im deutschsprachigen Raum" - DHd 2022 Kulturen des digitalen Gedächtnisses.

The subject “Science and Technology in the First World War” has so far been treated from the perspective on inventions and the development of new weapons, and often the focus has been on the topic of chemical warfare at the expense of other important dimensions. The approach of this Archival Research Guide, by contrast, comes from the social sciences and focuses on the establishment of relevant scientific, military and governmental bodies and on the personal networks established during the war. By examining these institutions and networks country by country, comparisons between them can be drawn, enabling further research with regard to the sociology of institutions. By pointing to the connections and channels of exchange between the nations and institutions under consideration, this approach opens up a transnational perspective and supports the paradoxal insight that transnational ties can dissolve national obstacles while simultaneously strengthening the nation-states themselves. On the individual level, the ARG takes the role of intellectuals into account, for whom scientific objectivity / neutrality and patriotic commitment seemed to have been no contradiction. It is remarkable that the First World War led to the establishment of several institutions aiming at funding science through the state, most notably in the case of France (CNRS), the U.S. (NACA/NASA) and Russia (KEPS). CENDARI Archival Research Guide

The paper describes objectives, concept and methodology for ELEXIS, a European infrastructure fostering cooperation and information exchange among lexicographical research communities. The infrastructure is a newly granted project under the Horizon 2020 INFRAIA call, with the topic Integrating Activities for Starting Communities. The project is planned to start in January 2018

Knowledge production has always act globally, and when it comes to the humanities early networks of scholars can still be traced in their letter correspondence. With the emergence of digital humanities more prominently in the 1970s, research communities have organized themselves in many different ways. The enthusiasm generated by the promises of what was sometimes perceived as a "new field" were to some extent echoed in new forms of institutionalization, to the point of defining a discipline in its own right. But the enthusiasms was also accompanied by a certain resistance of communities reluctant to introduce digital technology into their field.The term of "digital humanities" in these earlier days of adopting digital methods into the humanities created an area, a niche, inside which pioneers in Digital Humanities could gain critical mass. Today, where digital methods are far more widely applied, one can observe an almost opposite trend, the abandoning of a ‘specific label’ and a much broader advocacy concerning all humanities.What remains specific for DH communities is the close alliance between content providers (which themselves are in a process of digitisation content and access), humanities scholars applying digital methods, and computer scientists linking to new methodological achievements in their field. However, this alliance can express itself in very different forms of national and international organisation, and is far from following a specific model.This panel examines different ways of "forming a community" among digital humanities scholars and scholars in other fields, and other actors in DH. The contributions span a range from generic ways to design digital research infrastructures in the SSH, over national solutions to supranational coordination.The purpose of this panel is to unfold the diversity of the current "digital humanist movement”, not only to compare, but also to understand what is at stake for the actors involved and what impact the different forms of organisation have on creation and evolution of research communities. We further discuss issues of cohesion and durability. Through the papers presented, we will examine the impact of bottom-up, top-down and horizontal strategies as well as the adoption of hybrid solutions (organizational, disciplinary, methodological, scalar) in the design of research communities. This approach will allow us to put convergences and challenges into perspective and to question the re- compositions at work within SSH communities.This panel will highlight the experiences of SSH research communities from different cultures and organizations rooted at different levels of governance, such as some French communities structured around institutional nodes such as Maisons des Sciences de l'Homme (MSH), or research infrastructures at the national (TGIR Huma-Num) or European level (DARIAH ERIC); project based collaboration of research infrastructures (DANS, The Netherlands) and Canada (CRIHN); and professional networks and transnational associations related to digital humanities (e.g. Humanistica, the French-speaking association of digital humanities, or the Latin American network for digital humanities under construction). The comparison of the experiences presented will not produce a homogeneous and smooth image but will highlight differences in approaches and organisation. Even it seems nearly impossible to give account of every association that could be representative on a way to build community in DH, the chair of the session will make an introduction with a brief summary of this landscape. That said, besides the geographical aspect that we try to include, another is that we are giving voice to formal and informal associations such as the LatamHD network, that is just at an early stage and that is not yet defined in its goals. We decided to propose several solutions to deal with the diversity of needs and practises inside our communities and we wanted to present some of them to share our experiences and initiate discussions during this panel in order to develop collaborations with colleagues sharing the same kind of constraints.Thus, the objective is to have a broad discussion with the audience to broaden the perspectives to other experiences.This panel aims to contribute to the reflective work in the wider DH context about factors of constitution, consolidation and evolution of its research communities.

DARIAH, the digital humanities infrastructure with origins and an organisational home in Europe, is nearing the completion of its implementation phase. The significant investment from the European Commission and member countries has yielded a robust set of technical and social infrastructures, ranging from working groups, various registries, pedagogical materials, and software to support diverse approaches to digital humanities scholarship. While the funding and leadership of DARIAH to date has come from countries in, or contiguous with, Europe, the needs that drive its technical and social development are widely shared within the international digital humanities community beyond Europe. Scholars on every continent would benefit from well-supported technical tools and platforms, directories for facilitating access to information and resources, and support for working groups.The DARIAH Beyond Europe workshop series, organised and financed under the umbrella of the DESIR project (“DARIAH ERIC Sustainability Refined,” 2017–2019, funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program), convened three meetings between September 2018 and March 2019 in the United States and Australia. These workshops served as fora for cross-cultural exchange, and introduced many non-European DH scholars to DARIAH; each of the workshops included a significant delegation from various DARIAH bodies, together with a larger number of local presenters and participants. The local contexts for these workshops were significantly different in their embodiment of research infrastructures: on the one hand, in the U.S., a private research university (Stanford) and the de facto national library (the Library of Congress), both in a country with a history of unsuccessful national-scale infrastructure efforts; and in Australia, a system which has invested substantially more in coordinated national research infrastructure in science and technology, but very little on a national scale in the humanities and arts. Europe is in many respects ahead of both host countries in terms of its research infrastructure ecosystem both at the national and pan-European levels.The Stanford workshop had four main topics of focus: corpus management; text and image analysis; geohumanities; and music, theatre, and sound studies. As the first of the workshops, the Stanford group also took the lead in proposing next steps toward exploring actionable “DARIAH beyond Europe” initiatives, including the beginnings of a blog shared among participants from all the workshops, extra-European use of DARIAH’s DH Course Registry, and non-European participation in DARIAH Working Groups.The overall theme of the Library of Congress workshop was “Collections as Data,” building on a number of U.S.-based initiatives exploring how to enhance researcher engagement with digital collections through computationally-driven research. In Washington, D.C., the knowledge exchange sessions focussed on digitised newspapers and text analysis, infrastructural challenges for public humanities, and the use of web-archives in DH research. As at Stanford, interconnecting with DARIAH Working Groups was of core interest to participants, and a new Working Group was proposed to explore global access and use of digitised historical newspapers. A further important outcome was the agreement to explore collaboration between the U.S.-based “Collections as Data” initiatives and the Heritage Data Reuse Charter in Europe. The third and final workshop in the series took place in March 2019 in Australia, hosted by the National Library of Australia in Canberra. Convened by the Australian Academy of the Humanities (AAH), together with the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) and DARIAH, this event was co-located with the Academy’s second annual Humanities, Arts and Culture Data Summit. The first day of the event, targeted at research leadership and policy makers, was intended to explore new horizons for data-driven humanities and arts research, digital cultural collections and research infrastructure. The two subsequent days focused on engaging with a wide variety of communities, including (digital) humanities researchers and cultural heritage professionals. Organised around a series of Knowledge Exchange Sessions, combined with research-led lightning talks, the participants spoke in detail about how big ideas can be implemented practically on the ground. This poster reflects on the key outcomes and future directions arising from these three workshops, and considers what it might look like for DARIAH to be adopted as a fundamental DH infrastructure in a complex variety of international, national, and regional contexts, with diverse funding models, resources, needs, and expectations. One major outcome of all workshops was the shared recognition that, in spite of extensive funding, planning, and goodwill, these workshops were not nearly global enough in their reach: most importantly they were not inclusive of the Global South. Our new DARIAH beyond Europe community has a strong shared commitment to address this gap.