Digital humanities

Digital humanities (DH) is an area of

scholarly activity at the intersection of
computing or digital technologies and the
disciplines of the humanities. It includes
the systematic use of digital resources in
the humanities, as well as the analysis of
their application.[1][2] DH can be defined
as new ways of doing scholarship that
involve collaborative, transdisciplinary,
and computationally engaged research,
teaching, and publishing.[3] It brings
digital tools and methods to the study of
the humanities with the recognition that
the printed word is no longer the main
medium for knowledge production and Example of a textual analysis program being used to study a novel,
distribution.[3] with Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice in Voyant Tools

By producing and using new applications

and techniques, DH makes new kinds of teaching and research possible, while at the same time studying and
critiquing how these impact cultural heritage and digital culture.[2] Thus, a distinctive feature of DH is its
cultivation of a two-way relationship between the humanities and the digital: the field both employs
technology in the pursuit of humanities research and subjects technology to humanistic questioning and
interrogation, often simultaneously.

Contents
Definition
History
Values and methods
Tools
Projects
Digital archives
Cultural analytics
Textual mining, analysis, and visualization
Analysis of macroscopic trends in cultural change
Online publishing
Wikimedia projects
Criticism
Negative publicity
Black box
Diversity
Issues of access
 Cultural criticism
Difficulty of evaluation
Lack of focus on pedagogy
See also
References
Bibliography
External links

Definition
The definition of the digital humanities is being continually formulated by scholars and practitioners. Since the
field is constantly growing and changing, specific definitions can quickly become outdated or unnecessarily
limit future potential.[4] The second volume of Debates in the Digital Humanities (2016) acknowledges the
difficulty in defining the field: "Along with the digital archives, quantitative analyses, and tool-building
projects that once characterized the field, DH now encompasses a wide range of methods and practices:
visualizations of large image sets, 3D modeling of historical artifacts, 'born digital' dissertations, hashtag
activism and the analysis thereof, alternate reality games, mobile makerspaces, and more. In what has been
called 'big tent' DH, it can at times be difficult to determine with any specificity what, precisely, digital
humanities work entails."[5]

Historically, the digital humanities developed out of humanities computing and has become associated with
other fields, such as humanistic computing, social computing, and media studies. In concrete terms, the digital
humanities embraces a variety of topics, from curating online collections of primary sources (primarily textual)
to the data mining of large cultural data sets to topic modeling. Digital humanities incorporates both digitized
(remediated) and born-digital materials and combines the methodologies from traditional humanities disciplines
(such as rhetoric, history, philosophy, linguistics, literature, art, archaeology, music, and cultural studies) and
social sciences,[6] with tools provided by computing (such as hypertext, hypermedia, data visualisation,
information retrieval, data mining, statistics, text mining, digital mapping), and digital publishing. Related
subfields of digital humanities have emerged like software studies, platform studies, and critical code studies.
Fields that parallel the digital humanities include new media studies and information science as well as media
theory of composition, game studies, particularly in areas related to digital humanities project design and
production, and cultural analytics.

Berry and Fagerjord have suggested that a way to reconceptualise

digital humanities could be through a "digital humanities stack". They
argue that "this type of diagram is common in computation and
computer science to show how technologies are 'stacked' on top of
each other in increasing levels of abstraction. Here, [they] use the
method in a more illustrative and creative sense of showing the range
of activities, practices, skills, technologies and structures that could be
said to make up the digital humanities, with the aim of providing a The Digital Humanities Stack (from
high-level map."[7] Indeed, the "diagram can be read as the bottom Berry and Fagerjord, Digital
levels indicating some of the fundamental elements of the digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique
humanities stack, such as computational thinking and knowledge in a Digital Age)
representation, and then other elements that later build on these. "[8]

In practical terms, a major distinction within digital humanities is the focus on the data being processed. For
processing textual data, digital humanities builds on a long and extensive history of digital edition,
computational linguistics and natural language processing and developed an independent and highly
specialized technology stack (largely cumulating in the specifications of the Text Encoding Initiative). This
part of the field is sometimes thus set apart from Digital Humanities in general as `digital philology' or
`computational philology'. For the analysis and digital edition of objects or artifacts, different technologies are
required.

History
Digital humanities descends from the field of humanities computing, whose origins reach back to 1940s and
50s, in the pioneering work of Jesuit scholar Roberto Busa, which began in 1946,[9] and of English professor
Josephine Miles, beginning in the early 1950s.[10][11][12][13] In collaboration with IBM, Busa and his team
created a computer-generated concordance to Thomas Aquinas' writings known as the Index Thomisticus.[3]
Other scholars began using mainframe computers to automate tasks like word-searching, sorting, and counting,
which was much faster than processing information from texts with handwritten or typed index cards.[3] In the
decades which followed archaeologists, classicists, historians, literary scholars, and a broad array of humanities
researchers in other disciplines applied emerging computational methods to transform humanities
scholarship.[14][15]

As Tara McPherson has pointed out, the digital humanities also inherit practices and perspectives developed
through many artistic and theoretical engagements with electronic screen culture beginning the late 1960s and
1970s. These range from research developed by organizations such as SIGGRAPH to creations by artists such
as Charles and Ray Eames and the members of E.A.T. (Experiments in Art and Technology). The Eames and
E.A.T. explored nascent computer culture and intermediality in creative works that dovetailed technological
innovation with art.[16]

The first specialized journal in the digital humanities was Computers and the Humanities, which debuted in
1966. The Computer Applications and Quantitative Methods in Archaeology (CAA) association was founded
in 1973. The Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing (ALLC) and the Association for Computers
and the Humanities (ACH) were then founded in 1977 and 1978, respectively.[3]

Soon, there was a need for a standardized protocol for tagging digital texts, and the Text Encoding Initiative
(TEI) was developed.[3] The TEI project was launched in 1987 and published the first full version of the TEI
Guidelines in May 1994.[12] TEI helped shape the field of electronic textual scholarship and led to Extensible
Markup Language (XML), which is a tag scheme for digital editing. Researchers also began experimenting
with databases and hypertextual editing, which are structured around links and nodes, as opposed to the
standard linear convention of print.[3] In the nineties, major digital text and image archives emerged at centers
of humanities computing in the U.S. (e.g. the Women Writers Project, the Rossetti Archive,[17] and The William
Blake Archive[18]), which demonstrated the sophistication and robustness of text-encoding for literature.[19]
The advent of personal computing and the World Wide Web meant that Digital Humanities work could
become less centered on text and more on design. The multimedia nature of the internet has allowed Digital
Humanities work to incorporate audio, video, and other components in addition to text.[3]

The terminological change from "humanities computing" to "digital humanities" has been attributed to John
Unsworth, Susan Schreibman, and Ray Siemens who, as editors of the anthology A Companion to Digital
Humanities (2004), tried to prevent the field from being viewed as "mere digitization."[20] Consequently, the
hybrid term has created an overlap between fields like rhetoric and composition, which use "the methods of
contemporary humanities in studying digital objects,"[20] and digital humanities, which uses "digital
technology in studying traditional humanities objects".[20] The use of computational systems and the study of
computational media within the humanities, arts and social sciences more generally has been termed the
'computational turn'.[21]
In 2006 the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) launched the Digital Humanities Initiative
(renamed Office of Digital Humanities in 2008), which made widespread adoption of the term "digital
humanities" all but irreversible in the United States.[22]

Digital humanities emerged from its former niche status and became "big news"[22] at the 2009 MLA
convention in Philadelphia, where digital humanists made "some of the liveliest and most visible
contributions"[23] and had their field hailed as "the first 'next big thing' in a long time."[24]

Values and methods

Although digital humanities projects and initiatives are diverse, they often reflect common values and
methods.[25] These can help in understanding this hard-to-define field.

Values[25]

Critical and theoretical

Iterative and experimental
Collaborative and distributed
Multimodal and performative
Open and accessible

Methods[25]

Enhanced critical curation

Augmented editions and fluid textuality
Scale: the law of large numbers
Distant/close, macro/micro, surface/depth
Cultural analytics, aggregation, and data-mining
Visualization and data design
Locative investigation and thick mapping
The animated archive
Distributed knowledge production and performative access
Humanities gaming
Code, software, and platform studies
Database documentaries
Repurposable content and remix culture
Pervasive infrastructure
Ubiquitous scholarship

In keeping with the value of being open and accessible, many digital humanities projects and journals are open
access and/or under Creative Commons licensing, showing the field's "commitment to open standards and
open source."[26] Open access is designed to enable anyone with an internet-enabled device and internet
connection to view a website or read an article without having to pay, as well as share content with the
appropriate permissions.

Digital humanities scholars use computational methods either to answer existing research questions or to
challenge existing theoretical paradigms, generating new questions and pioneering new approaches. One goal
is to systematically integrate computer technology into the activities of humanities scholars,[27] as is done in
contemporary empirical social sciences. Yet despite the significant trend in digital humanities towards
networked and multimodal forms of knowledge, a substantial amount of digital humanities focuses on
documents and text in ways that differentiate the field's work from digital research in media studies,
information studies, communication studies, and sociology. Another goal of digital humanities is to create
scholarship that transcends textual sources. This includes the integration of multimedia, metadata, and dynamic
environments (see The Valley of the Shadow project at the University of Virginia, the Vectors Journal of
Culture and Technology in a Dynamic Vernacular at University of Southern California, or Digital Pioneers
projects at Harvard[28]). A growing number of researchers in digital humanities are using computational
methods for the analysis of large cultural data sets such as the Google Books corpus.[29] Examples of such
projects were highlighted by the Humanities High Performance Computing competition sponsored by the
Office of Digital Humanities in 2008,[30] and also by the Digging Into Data challenge organized in 2009[31]
and 2011[32] by NEH in collaboration with NSF,[33] and in partnership with JISC in the UK, and SSHRC in
Canada.[34] In addition to books, historical newspapers can also be analyzed with big data methods. The
analysis of vast quantities of historical newspaper content has showed how periodic structures can be
automatically discovered, and a similar analysis was performed on social media.[35][36] As part of the big data
revolution, gender bias, readability, content similarity, reader preferences, and even mood have been analyzed
based on text mining methods over millions of documents[37][38][39][40][41] and historical documents written in
literary Chinese.[42]

Digital humanities is also involved in the creation of software, providing "environments and tools for
producing, curating, and interacting with knowledge that is 'born digital' and lives in various digital
contexts."[43] In this context, the field is sometimes known as computational humanities.

Tools
Digital humanities scholars use a variety of digital tools for their
research, which may take place in an environment as small as a
mobile device or as large as a virtual reality lab. Environments for
"creating, publishing and working with digital scholarship include
everything from personal equipment to institutes and software to
cyberspace."[45] Some scholars use advanced programming
languages and databases, while others use less complex tools,
depending on their needs. DiRT (Digital Research Tools
Directory[46]) offers a registry of digital research tools for scholars.
TAPoR (Text Analysis Portal for Research[47]) is a gateway to text
analysis and retrieval tools. An accessible, free example of an online Narrative network of US Elections
textual analysis program is Voyant Tools,[48] which only requires the 2012[44]
user to copy and paste either a body of text or a URL and then click
the 'reveal' button to run the program. There is also an online list[49]
of online or downloadable Digital Humanities tools that are largely free, aimed toward helping students and
others who lack access to funding or institutional servers. Free, open source web publishing platforms like
WordPress and Omeka are also popular tools.

Projects
Digital humanities projects are more likely than traditional humanities work to involve a team or a lab, which
may be composed of faculty, staff, graduate or undergraduate students, information technology specialists, and
partners in galleries, libraries, archives, and museums. Credit and authorship are often given to multiple people
to reflect this collaborative nature, which is different from the sole authorship model in the traditional
humanities (and more like the natural sciences).[3]
There are thousands of digital humanities projects, ranging from small-scale ones with limited or no funding to
large-scale ones with multi-year financial support. Some are continually updated while others may not be due
to loss of support or interest, though they may still remain online in either a beta version or a finished form.
The following are a few examples of the variety of projects in the field:[50]

Digital archives

The Women Writers Project (begun in 1988) is a long-term research project to make pre-Victorian women
writers more accessible through an electronic collection of rare texts. The Walt Whitman Archive[51] (begun in
the 1990s) sought to create a hypertext and scholarly edition of Whitman's works and now includes
photographs, sounds, and the only comprehensive current bibliography of Whitman criticism. The Emily
Dickinson Archive (begun in 2013)[52] is a collection of high-resolution images of Dickinson's poetry
manuscripts as well as a searchable lexicon of over 9,000 words that appear in the poems.

as an archival tool at the League of Nations.[53]

The Slave Societies Digital Archive[54] (formerly

Ecclesiastical and Secular Sources for Slave Societies),
directed by Jane Landers[55] and hosted at Vanderbilt
University, preserves endangered ecclesiastical and
secular documents related to Africans and African-
descended peoples in slave societies. This Digital
Archive currently holds 500,000 unique images, dating
from the 16th to the 20th centuries, and documents the
history of between 6 and 8 million individuals. They are
the most extensive serial records for the history of
Africans in the Atlantic World and also include valuable
Example of network analysis
information on the indigenous, European, and Asian
populations who lived alongside them.

The involvement of librarians and archivists plays an important part in digital humanities projects because of
the recent expansion of their role so that it now covers digital curation, which is critical in the preservation,
promotion, and access to digital collections, as well as the application of scholarly orientation to digital
humanities projects.[56] A specific example involves the case of initiatives where archivists help scholars and
academics build their projects through their experience in evaluating, implementing, and customizing metadata
schemas for library collections.[57]

The initiatives at the National Autonomous University of Mexico is another example of a digital humanities
project. These include the digitization of 17th-century manuscripts, an electronic corpus of Mexican history
from the 16th to 19th century, and the visualization of pre-Hispanic archaeological sites in 3-D.[58]

Cultural analytics

"Cultural analytics" refers to the use of computational method for exploration and analysis of large visual
collections and also contemporary digital media. The concept was developed in 2005 by Lev Manovich who
then established the Cultural Analytics Lab in 2007 at Qualcomm Institute at California Institute for
Telecommunication and Information (Calit2). The lab has been using methods from the field of computer
science called Computer Vision many types of both historical and contemporary visual media—for example,
all covers of Time magazine published between 1923 and 2009,[59] 20,000 historical art photographs from the
collection in Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York,[60] one million pages from Manga books,[61]
and 16 million images shared on Instagram in 17 global cities.[62] Cultural analytics also includes using
methods from media design and data visualization to create interactive visual interfaces for exploration of large
visual collections e.g., Selfiecity and On Broadway.

Cultural analytics research is also addressing a number of theoretical questions. How can we "observe" giant
cultural universes of both user-generated and professional media content created today, without reducing them
to averages, outliers, or pre-existing categories? How can work with large cultural data help us question our
stereotypes and assumptions about cultures? What new theoretical cultural concepts and models are required
for studying global digital culture with its new mega-scale, speed, and connectivity?

The term "cultural analytics" (or "culture analytics") is now used by many other researchers, as exemplified by
two academic symposiums,[63] a four-month long research program at UCLA that brought together 120
leading researchers from university and industry labs,[64] an academic peer-review Journal of Cultural
Analytics: CA established in 2016,[65] and academic job listings.

Textual mining, analysis, and visualization

WordHoard (begun in 2004) is a free application that enables scholarly but non-technical users to read and
analyze, in new ways, deeply-tagged texts, including the canon of Early Greek epic, Chaucer, Shakespeare,
and Spenser. The Republic of Letters (begun in 2008)[66] seeks to visualize the social network of
Enlightenment writers through an interactive map and visualization tools. Network analysis and data
visualization is also used for reflections on the field itself – researchers may produce network maps of social
media interactions or infographics from data on digital humanities scholars and projects.

Analysis of macroscopic trends in cultural

change

Culturomics is a form of computational lexicology that studies human

behavior and cultural trends through the quantitative analysis of
digitized texts.[68][69] Researchers data mine large digital archives to
investigate cultural phenomena reflected in language and word
usage.[70] The term is an American neologism first described in a
2010 Science article called Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using
Millions of Digitized Books, co-authored by Harvard researchers Jean- Network analysis: graph of Digital
Baptiste Michel and Erez Lieberman Aiden.[71] Humanities Twitter users.[67]

A 2017 study[41] published in the Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of America compared the trajectory of n-grams over time in both
digitised books from the 2010 Science article[71] with those found in a large corpus of regional newspapers
from the United Kingdom over the course of 150 years. The study further went on to use more advanced
Natural language processing techniques to discover macroscopic trends in history and culture, including
gender bias, geographical focus, technology, and politics, along with accurate dates for specific events.

Online publishing

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (begun in 1995) is a dynamic reference work of terms, concepts,
and people from philosophy maintained by scholars in the field. MLA Commons[72] offers an open peer-
review site (where anyone can comment) for their ongoing curated collection of teaching artifacts in Digital
Pedagogy in the Humanities: Concepts, Models, and Experiments (2016).[73] The Debates in the Digital
Humanities platform contains volumes of the open-access book of the same title (2012 and 2016 editions) and
allows readers to interact with material by marking sentences as interesting or adding terms to a crowdsourced
index.

Wikimedia projects

Some research institutions work with the Wikimedia Foundation or volunteers of the community, for example,
to make freely licensed media files available via Wikimedia Commons or to link or load data sets with
Wikidata. Text analysis has been performed on the contribution history of articles on Wikipedia or its sister
projects.[74]

Criticism
In 2012, Matthew K. Gold identified a range of perceived criticisms of the field of digital humanities: "'a lack
of attention to issues of race, class, gender, and sexuality; a preference for research-driven projects over
pedagogical ones; an absence of political commitment; an inadequate level of diversity among its practitioners;
an inability to address texts under copyright; and an institutional concentration in well-funded research
universities".[75] Similarly Berry and Fagerjord have argued that a digital humanities should "focus on the
need to think critically about the implications of computational imaginaries, and raise some questions in this
regard. This is also to foreground the importance of the politics and norms that are embedded in digital
technology, algorithms and software. We need to explore how to negotiate between close and distant readings
of texts and how micro-analysis and macro-analysis can be usefully reconciled in humanist work."[76] Alan
Liu has argued, "while digital humanists develop tools, data, and metadata critically, therefore (e.g., debating
the 'ordered hierarchy of content objects' principle; disputing whether computation is best used for truth finding
or, as Lisa Samuels and Jerome McGann put it, 'deformance'; and so on) rarely do they extend their critique to
the full register of society, economics, politics, or culture."[77] Some of these concerns have given rise to the
emergent subfield of Critical Digital Humanities (CDH):

"Some key questions include: how do we make the invisible become visible in the study of
software? How is knowledge transformed when mediated through code and software? What are
the critical approaches to Big Data, visualization, digital methods, etc.? How does computation
create new disciplinary boundaries and gate-keeping functions? What are the new hegemonic
representations of the digital – 'geons', 'pixels', 'waves', visualization, visual rhetorics, etc.? How
do media changes create epistemic changes, and how can we look behind the 'screen essentialism'
of computational interfaces? Here we might also reflect on the way in which the practice of
making-visible also entails the making-invisible – computation involves making choices about
what is to be captured. "[76]

Negative publicity

Lauren F. Klein and Gold note that many appearances of the digital humanities in public media are often in a
critical fashion. Armand Leroi, writing in The New York Times, discusses the contrast between the algorithmic
analysis of themes in literary texts and the work of Harold Bloom, who qualitatively and phenomenologically
analyzes the themes of literature over time. Leroi questions whether or not the digital humanities can provide a
truly robust analysis of literature and social phenomenon or offer a novel alternative perspective on them. The
literary theorist Stanley Fish claims that the digital humanities pursue a revolutionary agenda and thereby
undermine the conventional standards of "pre-eminence, authority and disciplinary power."[78] However,
digital humanities scholars note that "Digital Humanities is an extension of traditional knowledge skills and
methods, not a replacement for them. Its distinctive contributions do not obliterate the insights of the past, but
add and supplement the humanities' long-standing commitment to scholarly interpretation, informed research,
structured argument, and dialogue within communities of practice".[3]

Some have hailed the digital humanities as a solution to the apparent problems within the humanities, namely a
decline in funding, a repeat of debates, and a fading set of theoretical claims and methodological
arguments.[79] Adam Kirsch, writing in the New Republic, calls this the "False Promise" of the digital
humanities.[80] While the rest of humanities and many social science departments are seeing a decline in
funding or prestige, the digital humanities has been seeing increasing funding and prestige. Burdened with the
problems of novelty, the digital humanities is discussed as either a revolutionary alternative to the humanities as
it is usually conceived or as simply new wine in old bottles. Kirsch believes that digital humanities
practitioners suffer from problems of being marketers rather than scholars, who attest to the grand capacity of
their research more than actually performing new analysis and when they do so, only performing trivial parlor
tricks of research. This form of criticism has been repeated by others, such as in Carl Staumshein, writing in
Inside Higher Education, who calls it a "Digital Humanities Bubble".[81] Later in the same publication,
Straumshein alleges that the digital humanities is a 'Corporatist Restructuring' of the Humanities.[82] Some see
the alliance of the digital humanities with business to be a positive turn that causes the business world to pay
more attention, thus bringing needed funding and attention to the humanities.[83] If it were not burdened by the
title of digital humanities, it could escape the allegations that it is elitist and unfairly funded.[84]

Black box

There has also been critique of the use of digital humanities tools by scholars who do not fully understand
what happens to the data they input and place too much trust in the "black box" of software that cannot be
sufficiently examined for errors.[85] Johanna Drucker, a professor at UCLA Department of Information
Studies, has criticized the "epistemological fallacies" prevalent in popular visualization tools and technologies
(such as Google's n-gram graph) used by digital humanities scholars and the general public, calling some
network diagramming and topic modeling tools "just too crude for humanistic work."[86] The lack of
transparency in these programs obscures the subjective nature of the data and its processing, she argues, as
these programs "generate standard diagrams based on conventional algorithms for screen display...mak[ing] it
very difficult for the semantics of the data processing to be made evident."[86]

Diversity

There has also been some recent controversy among practitioners of digital humanities around the role that
race and/or identity politics plays. Tara McPherson attributes some of the lack of racial diversity in digital
humanities to the modality of UNIX and computers themselves.[87] An open thread on DHpoco.org recently
garnered well over 100 comments on the issue of race in digital humanities, with scholars arguing about the
amount that racial (and other) biases affect the tools and texts available for digital humanities research.[88]
McPherson posits that there needs to be an understanding and theorizing of the implications of digital
technology and race, even when the subject for analysis appears not to be about race.

Amy E. Earhart criticizes what has become the new digital humanities "canon" in the shift from websites using
simple HTML to the usage of the TEI and visuals in textual recovery projects.[89] Works that has been
previously lost or excluded were afforded a new home on the internet, but much of the same marginalizing
practices found in traditional humanities also took place digitally. According to Earhart, there is a "need to
examine the canon that we, as digital humanists, are constructing, a canon that skews toward traditional texts
and excludes crucial work by women, people of color, and the LGBTQ community."[89]
Issues of access

Practitioners in digital humanities are also failing to meet the needs of users with disabilities. George H.
Williams argues that universal design is imperative for practitioners to increase usability because "many of the
otherwise most valuable digital resources are useless for people who are—for example—deaf or hard of
hearing, as well as for people who are blind, have low vision, or have difficulty distinguishing particular
colors."[90] In order to provide accessibility successfully, and productive universal design, it is important to
understand why and how users with disabilities are using the digital resources while remembering that all users
approach their informational needs differently.[90]

Cultural criticism

Digital humanities have been criticized for not only ignoring traditional questions of lineage and history in the
humanities, but lacking the fundamental cultural criticism that defines the humanities. However, it remains to
be seen whether or not the humanities have to be tied to cultural criticism, per se, in order to be the
humanities.[77][15] The sciences might imagine the Digital Humanities as a welcome improvement over the
non-quantitative methods of the humanities and social sciences.[91][92]

Difficulty of evaluation

As the field matures, there has been a recognition that the standard model of academic peer-review of work
may not be adequate for digital humanities projects, which often involve website components, databases, and
other non-print objects. Evaluation of quality and impact thus require a combination of old and new methods
of peer review.[3] One response has been the creation of the DHCommons Journal. This accepts non-
traditional submissions, especially mid-stage digital projects, and provides an innovative model of peer review
more suited for the multimedia, transdisciplinary, and milestone-driven nature of Digital Humanities projects.
Other professional humanities organizations, such as the American Historical Association and the Modern
Language Association, have developed guidelines for evaluating academic digital scholarship.[93][94]

Lack of focus on pedagogy

The 2012 edition of Debates in the Digital Humanities recognized the fact that pedagogy was the "neglected
'stepchild' of DH" and included an entire section on teaching the digital humanities.[5] Part of the reason is that
grants in the humanities are geared more toward research with quantifiable results rather than teaching
innovations, which are harder to measure.[5] In recognition of a need for more scholarship on the area of
teaching, Digital Humanities Pedagogy was published and offered case studies and strategies to address how
to teach digital humanities methods in various disciplines.

See also
Cyborg anthropology
Digital anthropology

References
1. Drucker, Johanna (September 2013). "Intro to Digital Humanities: Introduction" (http://dh101.hu
manities.ucla.edu/?page_id=13). UCLA Center for Digital Humanities. Retrieved December 26,
2016.
 2. Terras, Melissa (December 2011). "Quantifying Digital Humanities" (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/infostu
dies/melissa-terras/DigitalHumanitiesInfographic.pdf) (PDF). UCL Centre for Digital
Humanities. Retrieved December 26, 2016.
3. Burdick, Anne; Drucker, Johanna; Lunenfeld, Peter; Presner, Todd; Schnapp, Jeffrey
(November 2012). Digital_Humanities (https://web.archive.org/web/20161026210950/https://mit
press.mit.edu/sites/default/files/9780262018470_Open_Access_Edition.pdf) (PDF). Open
Access eBook: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262312097. Archived from the original (https://mitpress.m
it.edu/sites/default/files/9780262018470_Open_Access_Edition.pdf) (PDF) on 2016-10-26.
Retrieved 2016-12-26.
4. Warwick, Claire; Terras, Melissa; Nyhan, Julianne (2012-10-09). Digital Humanities in Practice
(https://books.google.com/books?id=Hla3uAAACAAJ&q=Digital+Humanities+in+practice).
Facet Publishing. ISBN 9781856047661.
5. "Debates in the Digital Humanities" (https://web.archive.org/web/20190512181840/http://dhdeb
ates.gc.cuny.edu/debates/2). dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu. Archived from the original (http://dhdebat
es.gc.cuny.edu/debates/2) on 2019-05-12. Retrieved 2016-12-29.
6. "Digital Humanities Network" (http://www.digitalhumanities.cam.ac.uk/). University of
Cambridge. Retrieved 27 December 2012.
7. Berry, David M.; Fagerjord (2017). Digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique in a Digital Age.
UK: Polity. p. 18. ISBN 9780745697666.
8. Berry, David M.; Fagerjord (2017). Digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique in a Digital Age.
UK: Polity. p. 19. ISBN 9780745697666.
9. Stagnaro, Angelo. "The Italian Jesuit Who Taught Computers to Talk to Us" (https://www.ncregi
ster.com/blog/astagnaro/the-italian-jesuit-who-taught-computers-to-talk-to-us?utm_source=goo
gle&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=ncrtraffic&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIzvCUlPPO6AIVSx-tBh
2YmAm6EAAYASAAEgKTBfD_BwE). ncregister.com. National Catholic Register. Retrieved
4 April 2020.
10. Heffernan, Laura; Sagner Buurma, Rachel (2018-04-11). "Search and Replace: Josephine
Miles and the Origins of Distant Reading" (https://modernismmodernity.org/forums/posts/search
-and-replace). Modernism / Modernity Print+. 3 (1). Retrieved 2018-08-17.
11. Svensson, Patrik (2009). "Humanities Computing as Digital Humanities" (http://digitalhumanitie
s.org/dhq/vol/3/3/000065/000065.html). Digital Humanities Quarterly. 3 (3). ISSN 1938-4122 (ht
tps://www.worldcat.org/issn/1938-4122). Retrieved 2012-05-30.
12. Hockney, Susan (2004). "The History of Humanities Computing" (http://www.digitalhumanities.
org/companion/view?docId=blackwell/9781405103213/9781405103213.xml&chunk.id=ss1-2-1
&toc.depth=1&toc.id=ss1-2-1&brand=9781405103213_brand). In Susan Schreibman; Ray
Siemens; John Unsworth (eds.). Companion to Digital Humanities. Blackwell Companions to
Literature and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell. ISBN 978-1405103213.
13. Wimmer, Mario (Fall 2019). "Josephine Miles (1911–1985): Doing Digital Humanism with and
without Machines". History of Humanities. 4 (2): 329–334. doi:10.1086/704850 (https://doi.org/1
0.1086%2F704850). S2CID 214042140 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:214042140).
14. Feeney, Mary & Ross, Seamus (1994). "Information Technology in Humanities Scholarship,
British Achievements, Prospects, and Barriers". Historical Social Research. 19 (1 (69)): 3–59.
JSTOR 20755828 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/20755828).
15. Berry, David M.; Fagerjord, Anders (2017). Digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique in a
Digital Age (http://ca.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0745697658,subjectCd-CO30.
html). Cambridge: Polity. ISBN 978-0-7456-9765-9.
16. McPherson, Tara. "DH by Design: Feminism, aesthetics + the digital." Congress of the Social
Science and Humanities. University of Calgary, 2016-05-31. Keynote.
17. Jerome J. McGann (ed.), Rossetti Archive (http://www.rossettiarchive.org/), Institute for
Advanced Technology in the Humanities, University of Virginia, retrieved 2012-06-16
18. Morris Eaves; Robert Essick; Joseph Viscomi (eds.), The William Blake Archive (http://www.bla
kearchive.org/), retrieved 2012-06-16
19. Liu, Alan (2004). "Transcendental Data: Toward a Cultural History and Aesthetics of the New
Encoded Discourse" (http://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/45m8t3xb). Critical Inquiry. 31 (1):
49–84. doi:10.1086/427302 (https://doi.org/10.1086%2F427302). ISSN 0093-1896 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/issn/0093-1896). JSTOR 10.1086/427302 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/
427302). S2CID 144101461 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:144101461).
20. Fitzpatrick, Kathleen (2011-05-08). "The humanities, done digitally" (http://chronicle.com/article/
The-Humanities-Done-Digitally/127382/). The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved
2011-07-10.
21. Berry, David (2011-06-01). "The Computational Turn: Thinking About the Digital Humanities" (h
ttps://web.archive.org/web/20120101152630/http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/articl
e/viewDownloadInterstitial/440/470). Culture Machine. Archived from the original (http://culture
machine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewDownloadInterstitial/440/470) on 2012-01-01. Retrieved
2012-01-31.
22. Kirschenbaum, Matthew G. (2010). "What is Digital Humanities and What's it Doing in English
Departments?" (http://mkirschenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/kirschenbaum_ade150.pdf)
(PDF). ADE Bulletin (150).
23. Howard, Jennifer (2009-12-31). "The MLA Convention in Translation" (http://chronicle.com/artic
le/The-MLA-Convention-in/63379/). The Chronicle of Higher Education. ISSN 0009-5982 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0009-5982). Retrieved 2012-05-31.
24. Pannapacker, William (2009-12-28). "The MLA and the Digital Humanities" (http://chronicle.co
m/blogPost/The-MLAthe-Digital/19468/) (The Chronicle of Higher Education). Brainstorm.
Retrieved 2012-05-30.
25. Honn, Josh. "A Guide to Digital Humanities: Values Methods" (https://web.archive.org/web/201
50919224700/http://sites.northwestern.edu/guidetodh/values-methods/). Northwestern
University Library. Archived from the original (http://sites.northwestern.edu/guidetodh/values-m
ethods/) on 19 September 2015. Retrieved 19 September 2015.
26. Bradley, John (2012). "No job for techies: Technical contributions to research in digital
humanities". In Marilyn Deegan; Willard McCarty (eds.). Collaborative Research in the Digital
Humanities. Farnham and Burlington: Ashgate. pp. 11–26 [14]. ISBN 9781409410683.
27. "Grant Opportunities" (http://www.neh.gov/ODH/Grant). National Endowment for the
Humanities, Office of Digital Humanities Grant Opportunities. Retrieved 25 January 2012.
28. "Harvard University Arts & Humanities Research Computing – Harvard University Arts &
Humanities Research Computing" (http://pioneers.darthcrimson.org/). Harvard University Arts &
Humanities Research Computing.
29. Roth, S. (2014), "Fashionable functions. A Google n-gram view of trends in functional
differentiation (1800-2000)", International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction, Band
10, Nr. 2, S. 34-58 (online: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2491422).
30. Bobley, Brett (December 1, 2008). "Grant Announcement for Humanities High Performance
Computing Program" (https://web.archive.org/web/20120926041822/http://www.neh.gov/divisio
ns/odh/grant-news/grant-announcement-humanities-high-performance-computing-program).
National Endowment for the Humanities. Archived from the original (http://www.neh.gov/divisio
ns/odh/grant-news/grant-announcement-humanities-high-performance-computing-program) on
September 26, 2012. Retrieved May 1, 2012.
31. "Awardees of 2009 Digging into Data Challenge" (https://web.archive.org/web/2012051701135
4/http://www.diggingintodata.org/Home/AwardRecipients2009/tabid/175/Default.aspx). Digging
into Data. 2009. Archived from the original (http://www.diggingintodata.org/Home/AwardRecipi
ents2009/tabid/175/Default.aspx) on May 17, 2012. Retrieved May 1, 2012.
32. "NEH Announces Winners of 2011 Digging Into Data Challenge" (http://www.neh.gov/news/pre
ss-release/2012-01-03). National Endowment for the Humanities. January 3, 2012. Retrieved
May 1, 2012.
33. Cohen, Patricia (2010-11-16). "Humanities Scholars Embrace Digital Technology" (https://ww
w.nytimes.com/2010/11/17/arts/17digital.html?pagewanted=all). The New York Times. New
York. ISSN 0362-4331 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0362-4331). Retrieved 2012-06-07.
34. Williford, Christa; Henry, Charles (June 2012). "Computationally Intensive Research in the
Humanities and Social Sciences: A Report on the Experiences of First Respondents to the
Digging Into Data Challenge" (http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub151). Council on Library and
Information Resources. ISBN 978-1-932326-40-6.
35. Dzogang, Fabon; Lansdall-Welfare, Thomas; Team, FindMyPast Newspaper; Cristianini, Nello
(2016-11-08). "Discovering Periodic Patterns in Historical News" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pmc/articles/PMC5100883). PLOS ONE. 11 (11): e0165736.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0165736 (https://doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0165736).
ISSN 1932-6203 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1932-6203). PMC 5100883 (https://www.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5100883). PMID 27824911 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2782
4911).
36. Seasonal Fluctuations in Collective Mood Revealed by Wikipedia Searches and Twitter Posts,
F Dzogang, T Lansdall-Welfare, N Cristianini – 2016 IEEE International Conference on Data
Mining, Workshop on Data Mining in Human Activity Analysis
37. Flaounas, I.; Turchi, M.; Ali, O.; Fyson, N.; Bie, T. De; Mosdell, N.; Lewis, J.; Cristianini, N.
(2010). "The Structure of EU Mediasphere" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC299
9531). PLOS ONE. 5 (12): e14243. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014243 (https://doi.org/10.137
1%2Fjournal.pone.0014243). PMC 2999531 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC29
99531). PMID 21170383 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21170383).
38. Lampos, V; Cristianini, N (2012). "Nowcasting Events from the Social Web with Statistical
Learning". ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology. 3 (4): 72.
doi:10.1145/2337542.2337557 (https://doi.org/10.1145%2F2337542.2337557).
S2CID 8297993 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:8297993).
39. NOAM: news outlets analysis and monitoring system; I Flaounas, O Ali, M Turchi, T Snowsill, F
Nicart, T De Bie, N Cristianini Proc. of the 2011 ACM SIGMOD international conference on
Management of data
40. Automatic discovery of patterns in media content, N Cristianini, Combinatorial Pattern
Matching, 2-13, 2011
41. Lansdall-Welfare, Thomas; Sudhahar, Saatviga; Thompson, James; Lewis, Justin; Team,
FindMyPast Newspaper; Cristianini, Nello (2017-01-09). "Content analysis of 150 years of
British periodicals" (http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2017/01/03/1606380114). Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences. 114 (4): E457–E465. doi:10.1073/pnas.1606380114 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1606380114). ISSN 0027-8424 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/00
27-8424). PMC 5278459 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5278459).
PMID 28069962 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28069962).
42. Bol, P. K., C.-L. Liu, and H. Wang. (2015) "Mining and discovering biographical information in
Difangzhi with a language-model-based approach", Proceedings of the 2015 International
Conference on Digital Humanities. (https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.02148)
43. Presner, Todd (2010). "Digital Humanities 2.0: A Report on Knowledge" (http://cnx.org/content/
m34246/latest/). Connexions. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
44. Automated analysis of the US presidential elections using Big Data and network analysis; S
Sudhahar, GA Veltri, N Cristianini; Big Data & Society 2 (1), 1-28, 2015
45. Gardiner, Eileen and Ronald G. Musto. (2015). The Digital Humanities: A Primer for Students
and Scholars. (http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/general/digital-humanities-prim
er-students-and-scholars?format=PB) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 83.
46. "Welcome // - DiRT Directory" (https://web.archive.org/web/20190424225139/http://dirtdirectory.
org/). dirtdirectory.org. Archived from the original (http://dirtdirectory.org/) on 2019-04-24.
Retrieved 2016-12-26.
47. "TAPoR" (https://archive.is/20170929202656/http://tapor-test.artsrn.ualberta.ca/home). tapor-
test.artsrn.ualberta.ca. Archived from the original (http://tapor-test.artsrn.ualberta.ca/home) on
2017-09-29.
48. "Voyant Tools" (http://voyant-tools.org/). voyant-tools.org.
49. "dhresourcesforprojectbuilding [licensed for non-commercial use only] / Digital Humanities
Tools" (http://dhresourcesforprojectbuilding.pbworks.com/w/page/69244319/Digital).
dhresourcesforprojectbuilding.pbworks.com.
50. See CUNY Academic Commons Wiki Archive (https://wiki.commons.gc.cuny.edu/Sample_Proj
ects/) for more.
51. "The Walt Whitman Archive" (http://www.whitmanarchive.org/). www.whitmanarchive.org.
52. "Emily Dickinson, From Fascicle to Open Access | Harvard University Press" (http://www.hup.h
arvard.edu/features/dickinson/). www.hup.harvard.edu. Retrieved 2016-12-26.. See Emily
Dickinson Archive website (http://www.edickinson.org/)
53. League of Nations archives, United Nations Office in Geneva. Network visualization and
analysis published in Grandjean, Martin (2014). "La connaissance est un réseau" (http://www.c
airn.info/resume.php?ID_ARTICLE=LCN_103_0037). Les Cahiers du Numérique. 10 (3): 37–
54. doi:10.3166/lcn.10.3.37-54 (https://doi.org/10.3166%2Flcn.10.3.37-54). Retrieved
2014-10-15.
54. "Homepage" (https://www.vanderbilt.edu/esss/). Slave Societies Digital Archive.
55. "People" (https://as.vanderbilt.edu/history/bio/jane-landers/). Department of History.
56. Sabharwal, Arjun (2015). Digital Curation in the Digital Humanities: Preserving and Promoting
Archival and Special Collections. Waltham, MA: Elsevier. p. 27. ISBN 9780081001431.
57. Sacco, Kathleen (2015). Supporting Digital Humanities for Knowledge Acquisition in Modern
Libraries. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. p. 22. ISBN 9781466684447.
58. Warwick, Claire; Terras, Melissa; Nyhan (2012). Digital Humanities in Practice. London: Facet
Publishing. p. 203. ISBN 9781856047661.
59. "Timeline: 4535 Time Magazine Covers, 1923-2009" (http://lab.culturalanalytics.info/2016/04/ti
meline-4535-time-magazine-covers-1923.html).
60. "A View from Above: Exploratory Visualizations of MoMA Photography Collection" (http://lab.cu
lturalanalytics.info/2016/04/exploratory-visualizations-of-thomas.html).
61. "Exploring One Million Manga Pages with Supercomputers and HIPerSpace" (http://lab.cultural
analytics.info/2010/11/one-million-manga-pages_14.html).
62. Manovich, Lev (2017). Instagram and Contemporary Image (http://manovich.net/index.php/proje
cts/instagram-and-contemporary-image).
63. "Cultural Analytics: Computational Approaches to the Study of Culture" (http://neubauercollegiu
m.uchicago.edu/events/uc/cultural_analytics/), the University of Chicago, May 2015 and
"Cultural Analytics symposium" (https://sites.google.com/nd.edu/ca2017/home), Notre Dame
University, May 2017.
64. "Culture Analytics program" (http://www.ipam.ucla.edu/programs/long-programs/culture-analyti
cs/), Institute for Pure and Applied Mathematics (IPAM), UCLA, March 7–June 10, 2016.
65. "Journal of Cultural Analytics: CA" (http://culturalanalytics.org/about/).
66. "Mapping the Republic of Letters" (https://www.neh.gov/humanities/2013/novemberdecember/f
eature/mapping-the-republic-letters). National Endowment for the Humanities. Retrieved
2016-12-26.
67. Grandjean, Martin (2016). "A social network analysis of Twitter: Mapping the digital humanities
community" (https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01517493/file/A%20social%20network%20anal
ysis%20of%20Twitter%20Mapping%20the%20digital%20humanities%20community.pdf)
(PDF). Cogent Arts & Humanities. 3 (1): 1171458. doi:10.1080/23311983.2016.1171458 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F23311983.2016.1171458). S2CID 114999767 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:114999767).
68. Cohen, Patricia (16 December 2010). "In 500 Billion Words, New Window on Culture" (https://w
ww.nytimes.com/2010/12/17/books/17words.html). New York Times.
69. Hayes, Brian (May–June 2011). "Bit Lit" (https://web.archive.org/web/20161018204747/http://w
ww.americanscientist.org/issues/id.12418,y.2011,no.3,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx)
. American Scientist. 99 (3): 190. doi:10.1511/2011.90.190 (https://doi.org/10.1511%2F2011.90.
190). Archived from the original (http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.12418,y.2011,no.3,
content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx) on 2016-10-18. Retrieved 2017-01-16.
70. Letcher, David W. (April 6, 2011). "Cultoromics: A New Way to See Temporal Changes in the
Prevalence of Words and Phrases" (https://web.archive.org/web/20160303215026/http://www.a
mhighed.com/documents/charleston2011/AIHE2011_Proceedings.pdf#page=228) (PDF).
American Institute of Higher Education 6th International Conference Proceedings. 4 (1): 228.
Archived from the original (http://www.amhighed.com/documents/charleston2011/AIHE2011_Pr
oceedings.pdf#page=228) (PDF) on March 3, 2016. Retrieved January 16, 2017.
71. Michel, Jean-Baptiste; Liberman Aiden, Erez (16 December 2010). "Quantitative Analysis of
Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279
742). Science. 331 (6014): 176–82. doi:10.1126/science.1199644 (https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fs
cience.1199644). PMC 3279742 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3279742).
PMID 21163965 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21163965).
72. "MLA Commons – An online community for MLA members" (https://mla.hcommons.org/).
73. "Digital Pedagogy in the Humanities - MLA Commons" (https://digitalpedagogy.mla.hcommons.
org/).
74. Rijshouwer, Emiel Alexander (2019). Organizing democracy : power concentration and self-
organizing bureaucratization in the evolution of Wikipedia. Uitermark, J.L. Rotterdam: Erasmus
Universiteit Rotterdam. ISBN 9789402813173. OCLC 1081174169 (https://www.worldcat.org/o
clc/1081174169).
75. "Debates in the Digital Humanities" (https://web.archive.org/web/20190421032743/http://dhdeb
ates.gc.cuny.edu/debates). Archived from the original (http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/debates/)
on 2019-04-21. Retrieved 2013-11-26.
76. Berry, David M.; Fagerjord (2017). Digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique in a Digital Age.
UK: Polity. p. 137. ISBN 9780745697666.
77. Liu, Alan. "Where is Cultural Criticism in the Digital Humanities?" (http://liu.english.ucsb.edu/w
here-is-cultural-criticism-in-the-digital-humanities/). UCSB. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
78. Fish, Stanley (2012-01-09). "The Digital Humanities and the Transcending of Mortality" (http://o
pinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/09/the-digital-humanities-and-the-transcending-of-mortal
ity/). The New York Times. New York. Retrieved 2012-05-30.
79. Leroi, Armand. "Digitizing the Humanities" (https://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/14/opinion/digitiz
ing-the-humanities.html). The New York Times Online. The New York Times. Retrieved 14 May
2016.
80. Kirsch, Adam. "Technology Is Taking Over English Departments" (https://newrepublic.com/articl
e/117428/limits-digital-humanities-adam-kirsch). The New Republic. The New Republic.
Retrieved 14 May 2016.
81. Straumshein, Carl. "Digital Humanities Bubble" (https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/0
5/08/digital-humanities-wont-save-humanities-digital-humanists-say). Inside Higher Education.
Retrieved 14 May 2016.
82. Straumshein, Carl. "Digital Humanities as 'Corporatist Restructuring' " (https://www.insidehighe
red.com/news/2016/05/06/article-criticizes-impact-digital-humanities-colleges). Inside Higher
Education. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
83. Carlson, Tracy. "Humanities and business go hand in hand" (https://www.bostonglobe.com/opi
nion/2016/04/24/humanities-and-business-hand-
hand/9nG9n04SSF1Ko0MRJjguxK/story.html). The Boston Globe. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
84. Pannapacker, William. "Stop Calling It 'Digital Humanities' " (http://chronicle.com/article/Stop-C
alling-It-Digital/137325/). Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
85. Dobson, James E. (2015). "Can an Algorithm be Disturbed? Machine Learning, Intrinsic
Criticism, and the Digital Humanities". College Literature. 42 (4): 543–564.
doi:10.1353/lit.2015.0037 (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Flit.2015.0037).
86. "Johanna Drucker (UCLA) Lecture, "Should Humanists Visualize Knowledge?" " (https://vimeo.
com/140307034). Vimeo. Retrieved 2016-01-25.
87. "Debates in the Digital Humanities" (http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/debates/text/29).
88. "Open Thread: The Digital Humanities as a Historical "Refuge" from
Race/Class/Gender/Sexuality/Disability?" (https://web.archive.org/web/20131203021953/http://
dhpoco.org/blog/2013/05/10/open-thread-the-digital-humanities-as-a-historical-refuge-from-rac
eclassgendersexualitydisability/). Archived from the original (http://dhpoco.org/blog/2013/05/10/
open-thread-the-digital-humanities-as-a-historical-refuge-from-raceclassgendersexualitydisabil
ity/) on 2013-12-03.
89. "Debates in the Digital Humanities" (http://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/debates/text/16).
dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu.
90. George H. Williams. "Disability, Universal Design, and the Digital Humanities" (http://dhdebate
s.gc.cuny.edu/debates/text/44). Debates in the Digital Humanities.
91. "Poetry in Motion" (http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v474/n7352/full/474420b.html).
Nature. Nature. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
92. Kirschenbaum, Matthew. "What Is "Digital Humanities," and Why Are They Saying Such
Terrible Things about It?" (https://mkirschenbaum.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/dhterriblethings
kirschenbaum.pdf) (PDF). Wordpress. Matthew Kirschenbaum. Retrieved 14 May 2016.
93. "Guidelines for Evaluating Work in Digital Humanities and Digital..." (https://www.mla.org/About
-Us/Governance/Committees/Committee-Listings/Professional-Issues/Committee-on-Informatio
n-Technology/Guidelines-for-Evaluating-Work-in-Digital-Humanities-and-Digital-Media)
Modern Language Association. Retrieved 2017-02-13.
94. "Guidelines for the Professional Evaluation of Digital Scholarship by Historians | AHA" (https://
www.historians.org/teaching-and-learning/digital-history-resources/evaluation-of-digital-scholar
ship-in-history/guidelines-for-the-professional-evaluation-of-digital-scholarship-by-historians).
www.historians.org. Retrieved 2017-02-13.

Bibliography
Beagle, Donald, (2014). Digital Humanities in the Research Commons: Precedents &
Prospects (http://acrl.ala.org/dh/2014/01/30/digital-humanities-in-the-research-commons-prece
dents-prospects-3/), Association of College & Research Libraries: dh+lib.
Benzon, William; Hays, David (1976). "Computational Linguistics and the Humanist" (https://w
ww.academia.edu/1334653). Computers and the Humanities. 10 (5): 265–274.
doi:10.1007/bf02420060 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fbf02420060). S2CID 62598283 (https://ap
i.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:62598283).
Berry, D. M., ed. (2012). Understanding Digital Humanities (http://www.palgrave.com/us/book/9
780230292642), Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Berry, D. M., Fagerjord, A. (2017). Digital Humanities: Knowledge and Critique in a Digital Age
(http://politybooks.com/bookdetail/?isbn=9780745697659), London: Polity.
Burdick, Anne, Johanna Drucker, Peter Lunenfeld, Todd Presner, & Jeffrey Schnap (2012).
Digital_Humanities (https://web.archive.org/web/20131023012128/http://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/
default/files/titles/content/9780262018470_Open_Access_Edition.pdf), The MIT Press
Busa, Roberto (1980). 'The Annals of Humanities Computing: The Index Thomisticus', in
Computers and the Humanities vol. 14, pp. 83–90. Computers and the Humanities (1966-2004)
Celentano, A., Cortesi, A. & Mastandrea, P. (2004). Informatica Umanistica: una disciplina di
confine, Mondo Digitale, vol. 4, pp. 44–55.
Classen, Christoph, Kinnebrock, Susanne, & Löblich, Maria, eds. (2012). Towards Web History:
Sources, Methods, and Challenges in the Digital Age (https://web.archive.org/web/2013060606
1117/http://www.gesis.org/hsr/aktuelle-ausgaben/aktuelle-hefte-2010-2012/374-the-economie-
des-conventions/). Historical Social Research, 37 (4), 97-188.
Condron Frances, Fraser, Michael & Sutherland, Stuart, eds. (2001). Oxford University
Computing Services Guide to Digital Resources for the Humanities (http://users.ox.ac.uk/~ctitex
t2/resguide2000/contents.shtml), West Virginia University Press.
Fitzpatrick, Kathleen (2011). Planned Obsolescence: Publishing, Technology, and the Future of
the Academy (https://web.archive.org/web/20110820165207/http://nyupress.org/books/book-de
tails.aspx?bookId=4998). New York; NYU Press. ISBN 9780814727874
Gardiner, Eileen and Ronald G. Musto. (2015). The Digital Humanities: A Primer for Students
and Scholars. (http://www.cambridge.org/us/academic/subjects/general/digital-humanities-prim
er-students-and-scholars?format=PB) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gold, Matthew K., ed. (2012). Debates in the Digital Humanities (https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/
projects/debates-in-the-digital-humanities). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Gold, Matthew K. and Klein, Lauren F. (2016). Debates in the Digital Humanities 2016 (https://d
hdebates.gc.cuny.edu/projects/debates-in-the-digital-humanities-2016). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Gold, Matthew K. and Klein, Lauren F. (2019). Debates in the Digital Humanities 2019 (https://d
hdebates.gc.cuny.edu/projects/debates-in-the-digital-humanities-2019). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Grandjean, Martin (2016). "A social network analysis of Twitter: Mapping the digital humanities
community" (https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01517493/file/A%20social%20network%20anal
ysis%20of%20Twitter%20Mapping%20the%20digital%20humanities%20community.pdf)
(PDF). Cogent Arts & Humanities. 3 (1): 1171458. doi:10.1080/23311983.2016.1171458 (http
s://doi.org/10.1080%2F23311983.2016.1171458). S2CID 114999767 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:114999767).
Hancock, B.; Giarlo, M.J. (2001). "Moving to XML: Latin texts XML conversion project at the
Center for Electronic Texts in the Humanities". Library Hi Tech. 19 (3): 257–264.
doi:10.1108/07378830110405139 (https://doi.org/10.1108%2F07378830110405139).
Heftberger, Adelheid (2016). Kollision der Kader. Dziga Vertovs Filme, die Visualisierung ihrer
Strukturen und die Digital Humanities. Munich: edition text + kritik.
Hockey, Susan (2001). Electronic Text in the Humanities: Principles and Practice, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Honing, Henkjan (2008). "The role of ICT in music research: A bridge too far?" (http://www.mcg.
uva.nl/abstracts/honing-2007b.html). International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing. 1
(1): 67–75. doi:10.3366/E1753854808000104 (https://doi.org/10.3366%2FE175385480800010
4).
Inman James, Reed, Cheryl, & Sands, Peter, eds. (2003). Electronic Collaboration in the
Humanities: Issues and Options, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kenna, Stephanie & Ross, Seamus, eds. (1995). Networking in the humanities: Proceedings of
the Second Conference on Scholarship and Technology in the Humanities held at Elvetham
Hall, Hampshire, UK 13–16 April 1994. London: Bowker-Saur.
Kirschenbaum, Matthew (2008). Mechanisms: New Media and the Forensic Imagination (http
s://web.archive.org/web/20120609161059/http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype
=2&tid=11336). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Manovich, Lev (2013). 'Software Takes Command. London and New York: Bloomsbury
Academic.
McCarty, Willard (2005). Humanities Computing, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
 Moretti, Franco (2007). Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for Literary History (http://www.ve
rsobooks.com/books/261-graphs-maps-trees). New York: Verso.
Mullings, Christine, Kenna, Stephanie, Deegan, Marilyn, & Ross, Seamus, eds. (1996). New
Technologies for the Humanities London: Bowker-Saur.
Newell, William H., ed. (1998). Interdisciplinarity: Essays from the Literature. New York:
College Entrance Examination Board.
Ramsay, Steve (2011). Reading Machines: Toward an Algorithmic Criticism (http://www.press.u
illinois.edu/books/catalog/75tms2pw9780252036415.html). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Schreibman, Susan, Siemens, Ray & Unsworth, John, eds (2004). A Companion To Digital
Humanities (http://www.digitalhumanities.org/companion/) Blackwell Publishers.
Selfridge-Field, Eleanor, ed. (1997). Beyond MIDI: The Handbook of Musical Codes.
Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Thaller, Manfred (2012). "Controversies around the Digital Humanities" (https://archive.is/20130
717083310/http://www.gesis.org/en/hsr/aktuelle-ausgaben/aktuelle-hefte-2010-2012/373-digita
l-humanities/). Historical Social Research. 37 (3): 7–229. Archived from the original (http://www.
gesis.org/en/hsr/aktuelle-ausgaben/aktuelle-hefte-2010-2012/373-digital-humanities/) on 2013-
07-17.
Swirski, Peter. (2013). From Literature to Biterature: Lem, Turing, Darwin, and Explorations in
Computer Literature, Philosophy of Mind, and Cultural Evolution (http://www.mqup.ca/from-liter
ature-to-biterature-products-9780773542952.php?page_id=73&), MQUP.
Tötösy de Zepetnek, Steven (2013). Digital Humanities and the Study of Intermediality in
Comparative Cultural Studies. Ed. Steven Tötösy de Zepetnek. West Lafayette: Purdue
Scholarly Publishing Services.
Unsworth, John (2005). Scholarly Primitives: What methods do humanities researchers have in
common, and how might our tools reflect this? (http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/~jmu2m/King
s.5-00/primitives.html)
Lansdall-Welfare, T; Sudhahar, S; Thompson, J; Lewis, J; Cristianini, N (2017). "Content
analysis of 150 years of British periodicals" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC527
8459). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 114 (4): 201606380. doi:10.1073/pnas.1606380114 (https://d
oi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.1606380114). PMC 5278459 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article
s/PMC5278459). PMID 28069962 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28069962)..
Warwick C., Terras, M., & Nyhan, J., eds (2012). Digital Humanities in Practice, Facet
Publishing
YOSHIDA,Yukihiko,"Leni Riefenstahl and German Expressionism: A Study of Visual Cultural
Studies Using Transdisciplinary Semantic Space of Specialized Dictionaries",Technoetic Arts:
a journal of speculative research (Editor Roy Ascott),Volume 8, Issue3,intellect,2008

External links
Debates in the Digital Humanities book series (https://dhdebates.gc.cuny.edu/)
Digital Humanities Quarterly (http://digitalhumanities.org/dhq/)
Intro to Digital Humanities (http://dh101.humanities.ucla.edu/) by UCLA Center for Digital
Humanities
CUNY Digital Humanities Resource Guide (https://wiki.commons.gc.cuny.edu/The_CUNY_Dig
ital_Humanities_Resource_Guide/) by CUNY Digital Humanities Initiative
DH Toychest: Guides and Introductions (http://dhresourcesforprojectbuilding.pbworks.com/w/pa
ge/69244275/Guides) curated by DH scholar Alan Liu
How did they make that? (http://miriamposner.com/blog/how-did-they-make-that/) by DH
scholar Miriam Posner
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Digital_humanities&oldid=990774761"

This page was last edited on 26 November 2020, at 12:42 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.