Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Report . 2023
License: CC BY
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Report . 2023
Data sources: ZENODO
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

This Research product is the result of merged Research products in OpenAIRE.

You have already added 0 works in your ORCID record related to the merged Research product.

CLS INFRA D3.2: Series of Five Short Survey Papers on Methodological Issues

Authors: Schöch, Christof; Dudar, Julia; Fileva, Evgeniia;

CLS INFRA D3.2: Series of Five Short Survey Papers on Methodological Issues

Abstract

Edited by Christof Schöch, Julia Dudar and Evgeniia Fileva. With contributions by Joanna Byszuk, Julia Dudar, Evegniia Fileva, Andressa Gomide, Lisanne van Rossum, Christof Schöch, Artjoms Šeļa and Karina van Dalen-Oskam. The aim of this publication is to document and describe current, widespread research practices in CLS, based on a large collection of publications that have been published in this field over the last approximately ten years. The perspective of this survey is primarily descriptive: it aims to document current, widespread practices as the authors were able to observe them in the published literature. In this sense, the survey can also serve as an annotated bibliography of sorts and as a guide to further reading. Despite the fact that this survey is not intended as an introductory textbook, it can nevertheless also serve as an introduction to several research areas or issues that are prominent within CLS as well as to several key methodological concerns that are of importance when performing research in CLS.

Keywords

Literary History, Introduction, Annotation, Gender, Canonicity, Computational Literary Studies, Authorship Attribution, Methods, Survey, Evaluation, Corpus Building, Preprocessing, Literary Genre, Analysis

86 references, page 1 of 9

Acerbi, Alberto, Alex Mesoudi, and Marco Smolla. 2022. Individual-Based Models of Cultural Evolution. A Step-by-Step Guide Using R. 1st Edition. Routledge. [OpenAIRE]

Ai, Zhou, Zhang Yijia, Wei Hao, and Lu Mingyu. 2021. “LDA-Transformer Model in Chinese Poetry Authorship Attribution.” In Information Retrieval, edited by Hongfei Lin, Min Zhang, and Liang Pang, 13026:59-73. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-030-88189-4_5.

Algee-Hewitt, Mark. 2017. “Distributed Character: Quantitative Models of the English Stage, 1550-1900.” New Literary History 48 (4): 751-82. https://doi.org/10.1353/nlh.2017.0038.

Algee-Hewitt, Mark, Sarah Allison, Marissa Gemma, Ryan Heuser, Franco Moretti, and Hannah Wasler. 2016. “Canon/Archive: Large-scale Dynamics in the Literary Field.” Pamphlets of the Stanford Literary Lab, no. 11. https://litlab.stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet11. pdf.

Algee-Hewitt, Mark, and Mark McGurl. 2015. “Between Canon and Corpus: Six Perspectives on 20th-Century Novels.” Pamphlets of the Stanford Literary Lab, no. 8. https://litlab. stanford.edu/LiteraryLabPamphlet8.pdf.

Andresen, Melanie, Markus Gärtner, Sibylle Hermann, Janina Jacke, Nora Ketschik, Felicitas Lea Kleinkopf, Jonas Kuhn, and Axel Pichler. 2022. “Vorzüge von Auszügen - Urheberrechtlich geschützte Texte in den digitalen Geisteswissenschaften (nach-)nutzen.” https: //doi.org/10.17175/2022_007.

Andrews, Tara, and Caroline Macé. 2012. “Trees of Texts - Models and Methods for an Updated Theory of Medieval Text Stemmatology.” In. https://dh-abstracts.library.virginia. edu/works/1521.

Anthony, Laurence. 2022. “What Can Corpus Software Do?” In The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited by Anne O'Keefe and Michael McCarthy, 2nd ed. Routledge Handbooks in Applied Linguistics. Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY: Routledge.

Antonia, Alexis, Hugh Craig, and Jack Elliott. 2014. “Language Chunking, Data Sparseness, and the Value of a Long Marker List: Explorations with Word n-Grams and Authorial Attribution.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 29 (2): 147-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/ llc/fqt028.

Archer, Jodie, and Matt Jockers. 2016. The Bestseller Code: Anatomy of the Blockbuster Novel. First edition. New York: St. Martin's Press.

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 69
    download downloads 49
  • citations
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    Powered byBIP!BIP!
  • 69
    views
    49
    downloads
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
download
citations
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
downloads
OpenAIRE UsageCountsDownloads provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
69
49
Green
Funded by
Related to Research communities
DARIAH EU