Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Institutional Arrangements in the Absence of Disciplinary Definitions: Digital Humanities in Switzerland Cover

Institutional Arrangements in the Absence of Disciplinary Definitions: Digital Humanities in Switzerland

Open Access
|Oct 2023

References

  1. Bensaude-Vincent, Bernadette. 2016. Building Multidisciplinary Research Fields: The Cases of Materials Science, Nanotechnology and Synthetic Biology. Pp. 45–60 in ˚e Local Configuration of New Research Fields: On Regional and National Diversity, edited by M. Merz and P. Sormani. Cham: Springer.
  2. Bunout, Estelle, Maud Ehrmann, and Frédéric Clavert (eds.). 2023. Digitised Newspapers – a New Eldorado for Historians? Reflections on Tools, Methods and Epistemology. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Oldenbourg.
  3. Callaway, Elizabeth, Jeffrey Turner, Heather Stone, and Adam Halstrom. 2020. The Push and Pull of Digital Humanities: Topic Modeling the “What Is Digital Humanities?” Genre. Digital Humanities Quarterly 14(1). http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/14/1/000450/000450.html (29.06.2023).
  4. Edmond, Jennifer. 2016. Collaboration and Infrastructure. Pp. 54–65 in A New Companion to Digital Humanities, edited by S. Schreibman, R. Siemens, and J. Unsworth. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
  5. Eve, Martin Paul. 2020. Violins in the Subway: Scarcity Correlations, Evaluative Cultures, and Disciplinary Authority in the Digital Humanities. Pp. 105–122 in Digital Technology and the Practices of Humanities Research, edited by J. Edmond. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.
  6. Fraistat, Neil. 2012. The Function of Digital Humanities Centers at the Present Time. Pp. 281–291 in Debates in the Digital Humanities, edited by M. K. Gold. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  7. Gieryn, Thomas F. 1983. Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists. American Sociological Review 48(6): 781–795.
  8. Hollingsworth, J Rogers. 2006. A Path-Dependent Perspective on Institutional and Organizational Factors Shaping Major Scientific Discoveries. Pp. 423–442 in Innovation, Science, and Institutional Change, edited by J. Hage and M. Meeus. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Jacobs, Jerry A. 2013. In Defense of Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.
  10. Jannidis, Fotis, Hubertus Kohle, and Malte Rehbein (eds.). 2017. Digital Humanities: Eine Einführung. Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler.
  11. Kemman, Max. 2021. Trading Zones of Digital History. Berlin: De Gruyter Oldenbourg.
  12. Kirsch, Adam. 02.05.2014. Technology Is Taking over English Departments. In ˚e New Republic. https://newrepublic.com/article/117428/ (15.04.2020).
  13. Kirschenbaum, Matthew G. 2014. “What Is ‘Digital Humanities,’ and Why Are They Saying Such Terrible Things about It?” Differences 25(1): 46–63.
  14. Klein, Julie Thompson. 2013. The State of the Field: Institutionalization of Interdisciplinarity. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies (31): 66–74.
  15. Klein, Julie Thompson. 2015. Interdisciplining Digital Humanities: Boundary Work in an Emerging Field. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
  16. Krishnan, Armin. 2009. What Are Academic Disciplines? Some Observations on the Disciplinarity Vs. Interdisciplinarity Debate. NCRM Working Paper. Southampton: ESRC National Centre for Research Methods.
  17. Lässig, Simone. 2021. Digital History: Challenges and Opportunities for the Profession. Geschichte und Gesellschaft 47(1): 5–34.
  18. Li Vigni, Fabrizio. 2021. Complexity Sciences: A Scientific Platform. Science & Technology Studies 34(4): 30–55.
  19. Liu, Alan. 2012. Where Is Cultural Criticism in the Digital Humanities? Pp. 490-510 in Debates in the Digital Humanities, edited by M. K. Gold. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  20. Luhmann, Jan, and Manuel Burghardt. 2021. Digital Humanities – A Discipline in Its Own Right? An Analysis of the Role and Position of Digital Humanities in the Academic Landscape. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 73(2): 148–171.
  21. McCarty, Willard. 2012. The Residue of Uniqueness. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung 37(3): 24–45.
  22. McCarty, Willard. 2014. Humanities Computing. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  23. Merz, Martina, and Philippe Sormani (eds.). 2016. ˚e Local Configuration of New Research Fields: On Regional and National Diversity. Cham: Springer.
  24. Moles, Abraham A. 1995. Les sciences de l’imprécis. Paris: Seuil.
  25. Oberbichler, Sarah, Emanuela Boroş, Antoine Doucet, Jani Marjanen, Eva Pfanzelter, Juha Rautiainen, Hannu Toivonen, and Mikko Tolonen. 2021. Integrated Interdisciplinary Workflows for Research on Historical Newspapers: Perspectives from Humanities Scholars, Computer Scientists, and Librarians. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 73(2): 225–239.
  26. Pidd, Michael. 2022. Building Digital Humanities Centers. Pp. 305–315 in ˚e Bloomsbury Handbook to the Digital Humanities, edited by J. O’Sullivan. Bloomsbury: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  27. Piotrowski, Michael. 2018. Digital Humanities: An Explication. In Proceedings of INF-DH 2018, edited by M. Burghardt and C. Müller-Birn. Berlin: Gesellschaft für Informatik.
  28. Piotrowski, Michael, and Mateusz Fafinski. 2020. Nothing New Under the Sun? Computational Humanities and the Methodology of History. Pp. 171–181 in CHR2020: Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Humanities Research, edited by F. Karsdorp, B. McGillivray, A. Nerghes, and M. Wevers. CEUR Workshop Proceedings.
  29. Ramsay, Stephen. 2013. Who’s in and Who’s Out. Pp. 239–241 in Defining Digital Humanities, edited by M. Terras, J. Nyhan, and E. Vanhoutte. Farnham: Ashgate.
  30. Saner, Philippe. 2019. Envisioning Higher Education: How Imagining the Future Shapes the Implementation of a New Field in Higher Education. Swiss Journal of Sociology 45(3): 359–381.
  31. Schreibman, Susan, Ray Siemens, and John Unsworth (eds.). 2004. A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwell.
  32. Small, Mario L. 1999. Departmental Conditions and the Emergence of New Disciplines: Two Cases in the Legitimation of African-American Studies. ˚eory and Society 28(5): 659–707.
  33. Sugimoto, Cassidy R., and Scott Weingart. 2015. The Kaleidoscope of Disciplinarity. Journal of Documentation 71(4): 775–794.
  34. Svensson, Patrik. 2011. The Digital Humanities as a Humanities Project. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 11(1–2): 42–60.
  35. Terras, Melissa. 2006. Disciplined: Using Educational Studies to Analyse “Humanities Computing”. Literary and Linguistic Computing 21(2): 229–246.
  36. Terras, Melissa, Julianne Nyhan, and Edward Vanhoutte (eds.). 2013. Defining Digital Humanities. Farnham: Ashgate.
  37. Van Hooland, Seth, Florence Gillet, Simon Hengchen, and Max De Wilde. 2016. Introduction aux humanités numériques : méthodes et pratiques. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck Supérieur.
  38. Warwick, Claire. 2012. Institutional Models for Digital Humanities. Pp. 193–216 in Digital Humanities in Practice, edited by C. Warwick, M. Terras, and J. Nyhan. London: Facet.
Language: English
Page range: 519 - 540
Published on: Oct 31, 2023
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 3 issues per year

© 2023 Michael Piotrowski, Max Kemman, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.