LISTSERV 16.5 - ARLIS-L Archives

Jenni:

She’d never get funded by the NEH. It, in step with the NSF and others, are requiring (or will soon) all data from sponsored research to be posted openly. Even where it’s not required, it’s an ethical stance that all numeric-data methodologies should adopt.

I’m not certain all of the humanities are moving from an a priori to an a posteriori model. Certainly anything that involves experimental data should be independently reproducible, regardless of the discipline. The critical point for the humanities moving in empirical circles is to do what E. H. Gombrich (most famously for art) espoused: Karl Popper’s empirical falsification. Broadly, one part of proving any theory—especially hard-to-prove ones—is that the opposite of your theory could not happen given your data. Those arguments are still rare in art history. We as info people can suggest that, too.

Thanks,

From: ARLIS/NA List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jenni M Rodda
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2014 9:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARLIS-L] Journal Impact Factors

Colleagues--

This has been an interesting thread for me, since IFA, like many other institutions, is moving forward with a number of digital humanities/art history and "big data"-ish projects. One of our PhD candidates is building 3-D models of 19th century exhibition spaces; another is working with 3-D printing to recreate buildings that no longer exist; still another is mapping funeral routes in Egypt using a combination of GIS information and aerial views of a site.

I would like to throw out an aside: If the humanities are now going to use the tools of hard science, specifically data analysis, should they be subject to the same strictures that define the sciences? Specifically, should the results of a humanities data analysis/"experiment" (if you will forgive me the extrapolation) be required to be reproducable? One of our PhD candidates showed me some beautiful graphs/visualizations of the data she has assembled on a specific topic; she pointed out to me that, since she assembled her own data, she isn't planning on necessarily sharing it any time soon--which means (and she knows this) no one else will be able to reproduce her "experiment," or her results. Perhaps rhetorically, what does that say about her thesis, and the conclusions she draws from her data analysis?

Food for thought, I suppose.

All best,

Jenni Rodda

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Lee Sorensen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Kathy’s comments are really worth underscoring—perhaps more optimistically than presented. I’m in the process of launching an analysis of visual resources/arts materials usage at Duke using both conventional and non-conventional statistics in a big-data project. This like project causes me to reflect.

Humanities usage is so different than the natural science disciplines—the ones for whom stats-driven assessment tools are principally designed (and the disciplines from which many of our administrators are drawn). One major factor is the length of usefulness of our print and e-materials: sources more than five years old are generally useless for the sciences and for the humanities they’re just becoming incorporated in the literature. Second, much citation literature is lexically driven. “Words in, words out.” It’s harder to trace image use (or a performance piece or architectural model—both of which might be variously titled). Third, publishing venues, like an exhibition catalog essay, have no equivalent in the science model and frequently don’t get noted in impact tools.

Most of this is known to this readership. What we shouldn’t do is throw up our hands. Open-source and big-data software is allowing the complicated tools—previously the jurisdiction of the hard scientist—into the hands of the humanities manager too. Kudos to Kathy for bringing our profound difference up. Let’s bring the ‘difference engine’ into the rail yard along with the big freight engines, too.

Lee Sorensen

Lilly Library

Duke University

From: ARLIS/NA List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kathy Edwards
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 4:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARLIS-L] Journal Impact Factors

Neither Scopus nor JCR are of much use on this, I’m afraid, because both pay little heed to the arts & humanities. Scopus is a bit more inclusive but not enough to carry the question.

In an informed universe, those who publish in the arts & humanities should not be subjected to the same “quality assessment” gauges & increments as scientists & social scientists, and it’s up to departments and department chairs to fight that good fight with their university administrations. And university administrations with their accrediting organizations…I know, I know, not gonna happen.

But this is an old song…in the end, the response will more likely be that arts & humanities devise their own JCR/Scopus-comparable “difference engine,” soon but not today.

Kathy Edwards

Research & Collection Development Librarian

Emery A. Gunnin Architecture Library

Clemson University

[log in to unmask]

(864) 656-4289

[log in to unmask]" alt="CUsigIcon">

From: ARLIS/NA List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Patricia Kosco Cossard
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 3:24 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARLIS-L] Journal Impact Factors

Do you have a subscription to Scopus or World of Science?

Patricia Kosco Cossard, M.A., M.L.S.

Research Commons Librarian

Rm 4118

McKeldin Library

University of Maryland

College Park, MD 20742

P 301-405-6316

From: <Craig>, "Susan V." <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: "Craig, Susan V." <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Monday, March 24, 2014 3:11 PM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [ARLIS-L] Journal Impact Factors

I have been trying to answer a question from the chair of our Architecture Dept. who would like me to provide her with a list of scholarly architecture journals based on impact factor and/or h index. I can supply the Core list of Architecture Journals from AASL and I can find the impact factor or h/index for a few selected architecture titles but I have not been able to locate a trustworthy list of architecture journals that includes the impact factor. Does anyone know of such a list? If not, is there something besides the Core List that you would recommend to answer this question?

Your suggestions would be appreciated.

Susan Craig
Art & Architecture Librarian
Univ. of Kansas
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mail submissions to [log in to unmask] For information about joining ARLIS/NA see: http://www.arlisna.org/join.html Send administrative matters (file requests, subscription requests, etc) to [log in to unmask] ARLIS-L Archives and subscription maintenance: http://lsv.arlisna.org Questions may be addressed to list owner (Judy Dyki) at: [log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

--
Jenni Rodda, Manager
Digital Media Services and Image Archive
(formerly Visual Resources Collections)
Institute of Fine Arts
1 East 78th Street
New York, NY 10075
212/992-5872 voice, 212/992-5807 fax
[log in to unmask] OR [log in to unmask]