Abstract
AbstractA widely shared recognition over the past decade is that the methodology and the basic concepts of science and technology studies (STS) can be used to analyze collaborations in the cross-disciplinary field of digital humanities (DH). The concepts of trading zones (Galison, 2010), boundary objects (Star and Griesemer, 1989), and interactional expertise (Collins and Evans, 2007) are particularly fruitful for describing projects in which researchers from massively different epistemic cultures (Knorr Cetina, 1999) are trying to develop a common language. The literature, however, primarily concentrates on examples where only two parties, historians and IT experts, work together. More exciting perspectives open up for analysis when more than two, more nuanced and different epistemic cultures seek a common language and common research goals. In the DECRYPT project funded by the Swedish Research Council, computational linguists, historians, computer scientists and AI experts, cryptologists, computer vision specialists, historical linguists, archivists, and philologists collaborate with strikingly different methodologies, publication patterns, and approaches. They develop and use common resources (including a database and a large collection of European historical texts) and tools (among others a code-breaking software, a hand-written text recognition tool for transcription), researching partly overlapping topics (handwritten historical ciphers and keys) to reach common goals. In this article, we aim to show how the STS concepts are illuminating when describing the mechanisms of the DECRYPT collaboration and shed some light on the best practices and challenges of a truly cross-disciplinary DH project.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference38 articles.
1. Chen J, Souibgui MA, Fornés A, Megyesi B (2021) Unsupervised alphabet matching in historical encrypted manuscript images. In: Dahlke C (ed) Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Historical Cryptology. HistoCrypt
2. Collins H, Sanders G (2007) They give you the keys and say ‘drive it!’ Managers, referred expertise, and other expertises. Stud Hist Philos Sci 38:621–641
3. Collins H, Evans R, Gorman M (2007) Trading zones and interactional expertise. Stud Hist Philos Sci 38(4):657–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.09.003
4. Collins H, Evans R, Gorman M (2017) Trading zones revisited. Unpublished manuscript. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.06327
5. Collins H, Evans R (2007) Rethinking expertise. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago