AbstractThis article contains a comparative study of heuristic textual practices in various scientific disciplines. By this we mean formulation practices with which new knowledge is generated in institutionally influenced routines and connected to existing knowledge, e. g. ‚highlighting the relevance of a research topic‘, ‚defining a concept‘ or ‚supporting a statement argumentatively‘.The aim is to find out to what extent such textual practices occur in different scientific disciplines, how they are distributed and combined. Furthermore, we study the effects domain-specific contexts have on heuristic textual practices. The data basis of our study is a corpus of 65 dissertations from the 13 different faculties of the TU Darmstadt. In the pilot study we report here, we examined the introductory chapters of the dissertations. Methodologically, it is an annotation study: Based on the current state of research on the subject, we have derived a basic annotation scheme, which we have developed and refined in a collaborative process of guideline creation. Our study affiliates on socio-pragmatic research on text production and formulation routines in the sciences. It is theoretically informed by the philosophy of science research on heuristics, methodically we make a contribution to the scientific debate on collaborative annotation procedures.
Assessing inter-annotator agreement from collaborative annotation campaign in marine bioacoustics
