The Difficult Joining of Theory and Empirical Research

Many approaches to the study of the social sciences rely on the interpretation of reality itself, giving rise to the quantitative/qualitative dispute. These methods cannot exist one without the other – nor can they necessarily find themselves on opposite poles. To follow one does not mean to forsake the other; on the contrary, both offer the opportunity to observe from different angles aspects of the phenomenon investigated, granting more effective readings of its complexity. While sociology has reproduced its various stances in its scholarly analyses, the most recent debate has relinquished this debate to focus on two alternative features. Both pertain to sociology and the role of social science researchers: the conjugation between theory and empirics and the crisis of sociology in providing answers to societal changes. This contribution aims to address the issues related to the conjugation between theory and empirical research considering digital research methods. The author outlines their strengths and weaknesses without forgetting the original status of sociology as a science.

Exploring National Library of Scotland datasets with Jupyter Notebooks

The National Library of Scotland’s Digital Scholarship Service has been releasing collections as data on its data-delivery platform, the Data Foundry, since September 2019. Following the COVID-19 lockdown, this service experienced significantly higher traffic, as library users increasingly made use of online resources. To ensure that as many users as possible were able to explore the datasets on the Data Foundry, the Library invested in a Digital Research Intern post, with a remit to provide introductory analysis of the Data Foundry collections using Jupyter Notebooks. This article provides a case study of this project, explaining the Library’s work to date around its new Digital Scholarship Service and releasing datasets on the Data Foundry; the reasoning behind the decision to begin to provide Jupyter Notebooks; the Notebooks themselves and what types of analysis they contain, as well as the challenges faced in creating them; and the publication and impact of the Notebooks.

Well-Behaved Variants Seldom Make the Apparatus: Stemmata and Apparatus in Digital Research

This article describes computer-assisted methods for the analysis of textual variation within large textual traditions. It focuses on the conversion of the XML apparatus into NEXUS, a file type commonly used in bioinformatics. Phylogenetics methods are described with particular emphasis on maximum parsimony, the preferred approach for our research. The article provides details on the reasons for favouring maximum parsimony, as well as explaining our choice of settings for PAUP. It gives examples of how to use VBase, our variant database, to query the data and gain a better understanding of the phylogenetic trees. The relationship between the apparatus and the stemma explained. After demonstrating the vast number of decisions taken during the analysis, the article concludes that as much as computers facilitate our work and help us expand our understanding, the role of the editor continues to be fundamental in the making of editions.

COVIDsmart Study: Evaluation of Statewide Mental Health Disparities in Digital Research. (Preprint)

BACKGROUND As digital health research is becoming a critical element of population health during the COVID-19 pandemic, efforts to recognize and integrate the digital research needs of individuals at risk for mental health disparities have lagged. This could result in poor community health outcomes and increased mental health disparities. OBJECTIVE We evaluated the digital COVIDsmart study for inclusiveness of populations at risk for mental health disparities. Additionally, we identified demographic and clinical characteristics of participants with higher rates of anxiety and/or depression during COVID-19, and potential emerging mental health disparities in the context of COVID-19 METHODS Using multiple recruitment strategies, a total of 782 participants were enrolled in the Virginia COVIDsmart prospective study. A HIPAA compliant digital platform was used to collect data on demographics, COVID-19 clinical parameters, health perceptions, mental and physical health, resilience, vaccination status, education/work functioning, social/family functioning, and economic impact. We assessed differences in frequencies of individuals at risk for mental health disparities and in demographic/clinical characteristics of participants with anxiety and/or depression. RESULTS The majority of participants enrolled in the COVIDsmart study were White (628/771, 81.5%), female (577/734, 78.6%), with at least a Master’s degree (483/771, 62.6%), an annual household income of at least $100,000 (389/771, 51%), living in non-rural areas (758/771, 98%), with health insurance (718/728, 98.6%), and between ages 36 and 65 years (471/736, 64%). Although anxiety and/or depression rates were high for all groups, significant differences were found among age groups (P<.001), gender (P<.001), annual household income (P=.014), and comorbid cancer and neurological disorders (P<.05). CONCLUSIONS Digital research methods may provide opportunities to rapidly study the numerous health impacts of COVID-19, which are currently not fully understood. However, digital health research inclusiveness remains challenging. COVIDsmart study did not achieve expected representation of individuals at risk for mental health disparities. Nevertheless, we found substantial anxiety and/or depression across all demographic and clinical groups. Areas of potential emerging mental health disparities in digital research may include low resiliency, low health literacy, and being a woman between 18 and 35 years. Further research is necessary to understand participation barriers and emerging mental health disparities during COVID-19, which impact digital research practices.

Toward Undogmatic Reading. Narratology, Digital Humanities and Beyond

Both Narratology and Digital Humanities look back on a remarkable history of research and progress. One after the other, the narratological and the digital research communities evolved into large international and interdisciplinary networks. While cooperation between the two disciplines would be possible and beneficial in many areas, they often still work in parallel rather than together. A workshop at Hamburg University brought together Literary Studies researchers from Narratology and from Digital Humanities to (a) discuss requirements for and possibilities of a digital operationalisation of analytical categories from Narratology and Literary Studies and (b) theoretically reflect upon possible connections between more traditional and digital approaches. The present volume combines the workshop contributions from both disciplines and thus attempts to further the bridge-building and dialogue.