Home About Subscribe Search Member Area

Humanist Discussion Group

< Back to Volume 33

Humanist Archives: April 6, 2020, 9:12 a.m. Humanist 33.734 - checking citations

                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 33, No. 734.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                   Hosted by King's Digital Lab
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org

    [1]    From: maurizio lana 
           Subject: Re: [Humanist] 33.731: checking citations (79)

    [2]    From: Nathaniel Bobbitt 
           Subject: checking citations (46)

        Date: 2020-04-05 16:48:13+00:00
        From: maurizio lana 
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 33.731: checking citations

a core of my LIS course in information literacy for BA students is the
investigation of the cited sources: in order to come back to the
'originating one'. going back like salmons rising up the stream. in
order to do so methodology and tools are needed.
and, symmetrically, another core is how to cite sources in order to
allow the reader to come back to the originating source.
speaking to the BA students a duality appears, between scientifc texts
and (old) media: for scientific texts, already before the digital, at
least in principle it was a formal rule that of citing the sources; in
the (old)media like printed newspapers, TV or radio broadcasting it
wasn't. and today we continue to read newspapers or listen to TV news
saying that "according to a study of UN in Syria chemical weapons were
used" and it's up tp you finding that study, if you want. while (new)
media like digital only magazines (e.g. Wired) or digital versions of
printed magazines (e.g. Economist, Guardian) in every article contain
links to the relevant sources of their content.

Il 05/04/20 10:13, Humanist ha scritto:
>                    Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 33, No. 731.
>              Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
>                     Hosted by King's Digital Lab
>                         www.dhhumanist.org
>                  Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
>          Date: 2020-04-04 07:37:11+00:00
>          From: Willard McCarty 
>          Subject: citations
> I began the research for my doctoral dissertation well trained, taught
> always to check references. During that time, however, I first
> discovered how undependable a reference could be. In addition to errors
> from sloppiness I discovered the tell-tale phenomenon of citations that
> lead to others earlier that lead to others still earlier, in a long tail
> that eventually terminates in pure invention. Since then I've made it a
> practice to hunt down the original source and seldom gone unrewarded,
> not just by errors discovered but also by contexts as valuable, sometimes
> more so, than what an originating quotation or reference gave me.
> Doing such tracing is costly in time and effort, but nowadays can almost
> always be done without budging from one's desk (which, given the need for
> isolation at this moment stretching out into an indefinite future, is a
> very good thing).
> On the other hand, I've learned from my medievalist partner how the words
> of authorities were used in the early Middle Ages in glosses to important
> texts. So I am already inclined to wonder about the drive to exactitude
> in our bibliographic habits, even before I reflect on the influence of
> online resources. Some rethinking of the methods we advocate, perhaps?
> Long ago, in the one MA course I can still remember, a professor to
> whom I will always be grateful taught all of us beginners how to use a
> library, how to take notes (before photocopy machines), in short how to
> do research. Does anyone now teach beginning scholars these skills and
> techniques digitally translated or entirely new?
> Yours,
> WM
> --
> Willard McCarty (www.mccarty.org.uk/),
> Professor emeritus, Department of Digital Humanities, King's College
> London; Editor, Interdisciplinary Science Reviews
> (www.tandfonline.com/loi/yisr20) and Humanist (www.dhhumanist.org)

Maurizio Lana
Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici
Università  del Piemonte Orientale
piazza Roma 36 - 13100 Vercelli
tel. +39 347 7370925

        Date: 2020-04-05 16:23:38+00:00
        From: Nathaniel Bobbitt 
        Subject: checking citations

Bibliographic research: Digital Humanities and Corpus Linguistics.

 High throughput in bibliographic research is relevant for DH.

In traditional bibliographic research primary resources are essential for
developing a well-informed background. High throughput research in DH might
consider additional resources: large-scale reviews using corpus linguistics
tools & online specialized (federated) databases (e.g. genomic species specific
or tools available at the National Center Biological Information). My undergrad
research project on "thought and language" investigated communication systems
via an evolutionary study of nonhuman primates: scent-marking species vs color
vision in species. I considered 1,124 MeSh (medical subject headings) keywords
(National Medical Library) to examine 1,945 abstracts with a subset of 335
papers related with olfaction and GPCR multigene families.

This required adapting corpus linguistics tools (including Mendeley, Bibtex.
etc) and asking questions related with visually structured content. A limitation
in traditional research is the highly lexical foundation in bibliographic
research. Research on biological phenomena with applications in the humanities
warrants additional practices using visual structures to consider heterogeneity
and multiscale complexity.

This experience informed my graduate research framed by a federated knowledge
resource (MeSh Browser) and non-linear navigation of knowledge  hyperbolic tree
(Tree of Science or "TheBrain" interface). The interdisciplinary hierarchy in
the MeSh Browser provides an ability to consider literature reviews and keywords
as a multidimensional grid with computational controls.

Traditional bibliography research points toward a progressive discussion. I
suspect one does bounce back and forth finding new uses for earlier research. In
a clinical case, on Galvani and Volta are relevant as one considers storage: how
individuals with similar traumatic history and socio-economic background may
exhibit distinct resilience. The question on quantifying resilience is a problem
of storage (electrophysiology). This is a question relevant to behavioral
studies of communication based upon biological markers. Bibliographic research I
suspect reaches across dates. There are two types of tempi in bibliographic
research: retentive tempi (tenseless) and next-step (discovery).

I imagine checking sources in part is a problem of seeing how sources weave
together or function as a mosaic. Each of these practices follows a distinct
level of scholarship and navigational tools.

Nathaniel Bobbitt

Unsubscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted
List posts to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
List info and archives at at: http://dhhumanist.org
Listmember interface at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted/
Subscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/membership_form.php

Editor: Willard McCarty (King's College London, U.K.; Western Sydney University, Australia)
Software designer: Malgosia Askanas (Mind-Crafts)

This site is maintained under a service level agreement by King's Digital Lab.