Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  1. Zeng, M.L.; Sula, C.A.; Gracy, K.F.; Hyvönen, E.; Alves Lima, V.M.: JASIST special issue on digital humanities (DH) : guest editorial (2022) 0.05
    0.054314356 = product of:
      0.10862871 = sum of:
        0.073545694 = weight(_text_:et in 462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.073545694 = score(doc=462,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.20477319 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.692005 = idf(docFreq=1101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.35915685 = fieldWeight in 462, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.692005 = idf(docFreq=1101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=462)
        0.03508302 = product of:
          0.07016604 = sum of:
            0.07016604 = weight(_text_:al in 462) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07016604 = score(doc=462,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.20001286 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.582931 = idf(docFreq=1228, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043643 = queryNorm
                0.3508076 = fieldWeight in 462, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.582931 = idf(docFreq=1228, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=462)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    More than 15 years ago, A Companion to Digital Humanities marked out the area of digital humanities (DH) "as a discipline in its own right" (Schreibman et al., 2004, p. xxiii). In the years that followed, there is ample evidence that the DH domain, formed by the intersection of humanities disciplines and digital information technology, has undergone remarkable expansion. This growth is reflected in A New Companion to Digital Humanities (Schreibman et al., 2016). The extensively revised contents of the second edition were contributed by a global team of authors who are pioneers of innovative research in the field. Over this formative period, DH has become a widely recognized, impactful mode of scholarship and an institutional unit for collaborative, transdisciplinary, and computationally engaged research, teaching, and publication (Burdick et al., 2012; Svensson, 2010; Van Ruyskensvelde, 2014). The field of DH has advanced tremendously over the last decade and continues to expand. Meanwhile, competing definitions and approaches of DH scholars continue to spark debate. "Complexity" was a theme of the DH2019 international conference, as it demonstrates the multifaceted connections within DH scholarship today (Alliance of Digital Humanities Organizations, 2019). Yet, while it is often assumed that the DH is in flux and not particularly fixed as an institutional or intellectual construct, there are also obviously touchstones within the DH field, most visibly in the relationship between traditional humanities disciplines and technological infrastructures. Thus, it is still meaningful to "bring together the humanistic and the digital through embracing a non-territorial and liminal zone" (Svensson, 2016, p. 477). This is the focus of this JASIST special issue, which mirrors the increasing attention on DH worldwide.
  2. Luhmann, J.; Burghardt, M.: Digital humanities - A discipline in its own right? : an analysis of the role and position of digital humanities in the academic landscape (2022) 0.04
    0.039198004 = product of:
      0.07839601 = sum of:
        0.053077027 = weight(_text_:et in 460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053077027 = score(doc=460,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20477319 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.692005 = idf(docFreq=1101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.2591991 = fieldWeight in 460, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.692005 = idf(docFreq=1101, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=460)
        0.025318984 = product of:
          0.050637968 = sum of:
            0.050637968 = weight(_text_:al in 460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.050637968 = score(doc=460,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.20001286 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.582931 = idf(docFreq=1228, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043643 = queryNorm
                0.25317356 = fieldWeight in 460, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.582931 = idf(docFreq=1228, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=460)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Although digital humanities (DH) has received a lot of attention in recent years, its status as "a discipline in its own right" (Schreibman et al., A companion to digital humanities (pp. xxiii-xxvii). Blackwell; 2004) and its position in the overall academic landscape are still being negotiated. While there are countless essays and opinion pieces that debate the status of DH, little research has been dedicated to exploring the field in a systematic and empirical way (Poole, Journal of Documentation; 2017:73). This study aims to contribute to the existing research gap by comparing articles published over the past three decades in three established English-language DH journals (Computers and the Humanities, Literary and Linguistic Computing, Digital Humanities Quarterly) with research articles from journals in 15 other academic disciplines (corpus size: 34,041 articles; 299 million tokens). As a method of analysis, we use latent Dirichlet allocation topic modeling, combined with recent approaches that aggregate topic models by means of hierarchical agglomerative clustering. Our findings indicate that DH is simultaneously a discipline in its own right and a highly interdisciplinary field, with many connecting factors to neighboring disciplines-first and foremost, computational linguistics, and information science. Detailed descriptive analyses shed some light on the diachronic development of DH and also highlight topics that are characteristic for DH.
  3. Brembs, B.; Förstner, K.; Kraker, P.; Lauer, G.; Müller-Birn, C.; Schönbrodt, F.; Siems, R.: Auf einmal Laborratte (2021) 0.01
    0.014343265 = product of:
      0.05737306 = sum of:
        0.05737306 = weight(_text_:c in 83) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05737306 = score(doc=83,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.381109 = fieldWeight in 83, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=83)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  4. Frick, C.; Kaier, C.: Publikationskosten für Zeitschriftenartikel abseits von Open-Access-Publikationsfonds : Lost in Transformation? (2020) 0.01
    0.014199109 = product of:
      0.056796435 = sum of:
        0.056796435 = weight(_text_:c in 69) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056796435 = score(doc=69,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.3772787 = fieldWeight in 69, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=69)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  5. Wolf, C.: Open Access Helper : neue Funktionen kurz vorgestellt (2021) 0.01
    0.00860596 = product of:
      0.03442384 = sum of:
        0.03442384 = weight(_text_:c in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03442384 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.22866541 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  6. Cabanac, G.; Labbé, C.: Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature (2021) 0.01
    0.0071716327 = product of:
      0.02868653 = sum of:
        0.02868653 = weight(_text_:c in 410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02868653 = score(doc=410,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1505424 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043643 = queryNorm
            0.1905545 = fieldWeight in 410, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=410)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
  7. Krüger, N.; Pianos, T.: Lernmaterialien für junge Forschende in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften als Open Educational Resources (OER) (2021) 0.01
    0.0051738964 = product of:
      0.020695586 = sum of:
        0.020695586 = product of:
          0.04139117 = sum of:
            0.04139117 = weight(_text_:22 in 252) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04139117 = score(doc=252,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15283036 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.043643 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 252, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=252)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Date
    22. 5.2021 12:43:05