The decision of what to do after college is something everyone faces during their final year of college. As I’m on my way to finishing my undergraduate degree in Digital Humanities, I’m in the same position as many other students have been at this point of their study.. What’s next? This had me wondering through the internet, researching positions, masters degrees or graduate programs that suited my skills, abilities and interests. About an hour into this search, I stumbled across CareerExplorer.
Who can resist quizzes like this? Well I for one, could not.
I have always thoroughly enjoyed studying Digital Humanities in UCC. Not only because of the course content but also because of the incredibly supportive, encouraging and caring lecturers I’ve been lucky enough to have throughout the years. There’s no doubt in my mind that without the people who carry this department, my experience would not have been the same. That being said, I’ve always had a huge interest in everything we have been taught in our modules which has made the assignments, projects and exams feel less like struggles and more like opportunities to learn.
The first time I had to smile to myself when doing this quiz, was when I got my first pop up saying my top areas of study were computer and information sciences, liberal arts and humanities, history, business and social sciences. What a blessing that I have been exposed to all of these areas throughout my undergraduate degree.
As I continued answering various questions, I became increasingly appreciative of the fact that I at a young age, due to my love of research, I spent a considerable long time deciding what undergraduate degree I wanted to pursue after my leaving certificate. Regardless of the points needed, location or postgraduate opportunities, I knew it was essential to follow a path that I was truly interested in. Following the advice that I had been given from a young age from my father, to make decisions and follow my aspirations as an individual regardless of what society dictates.
I researched every possible path, from veterinary nursing to law, however, I knew I had definitive areas that I loved.. Information technology, academic research and behavioural economics. When I found that there was a new degree emerging, only taught in two universities in Ireland, which allowed you to study both computing and humanities as well as taking an economic elective, I was over the moon. I didn’t think a degree like this existed, well, I guess the fact that it didn’t a couple of years ago is why I’d have that assumption!
My experience of the course has been wonderful from the beginning, although I had not committed myself to my academics until second year as the college experience regrettably seemed to be my priority before that. Regardless of this, I was determined to pursue the degree to the best of my ability going forward. I took on part time work that related to my degree, researched trends and developments within the discipline in my spare time and involved myself as much as possible in seminars, workshops and events. Which has led me to have incredible opportunities in Google, VMware, Workday, IBM and Facebook as well as starting my own Web Design & Development business.
As well as the career opportunities, Digital Humanities has impacted my viewpoints across loads of areas of my life. I find myself critically thinking about information, monitoring my digital identity as well as subconsciously evaluating sources online. Definitely behaviours I didn’t anticipate when choosing to pursue this degree. Nevertheless are welcome aspects to having learned everything I have learned over the past 3 years. It’s not often that people can be in a position where they find a degree that is able to provide them with everything and more than they need to satisfy their natural curiosities, interests and passions.
Continuing on to the “personality archetype” section of the quiz, I get the pop up “You are a Humanitarian” which caused me to smile to myself for the second time. As well as the note that it’s considered “very rare”. It reinstated the belief that I was in an area that was right for me, which is a comforting thought. Although I recognise that the question and answers type of categorization can be flawed, it still brings reassurance to the fact that I’ve chosen a suitable area of study.
Going forward, I have a strong idea of what I’ll do next but remain open minded about opportunities or changes to this plan. Regardless of what happens next, I remain very grateful for the academic path I’ve taken and especially to those who have made this path possible. The work being put into the Digital Humanities department in UCC is inspiring and doesn’t go unnoticed, coming from the perspective of students, who ultimately reap the benefits of having such hard working, dedicated people there supporting their academic journeys.
Earlier this week I had the pleasure of being exposed to an incredibly exciting project presented by Dr Máirín MacCarron as part of a Digital Humanities Colloquium in University College Cork. The project is funded by the Leverhulme Trust and is titled “Women, Conflict and Peace: Gendered Networks in Early Medieval Narratives (c. 330-735)”. It will analyse how early medieval history-writing fitted women and their networks into stories of conflict and peace-building, during a historical period that was marred by warfare, feud and religious conflict.
The project investigators come from a variety of disciplines so there is a broad range of expertise involved, enabling the information to be very comprehensive and powerful. The team comprises of physicists, computer scientists, engineers and historians which naturally all have differences in their approaches. This array of knowledge adds immeasurably to the project as it allows different perspectives and interpretations to be given as well as a range of approaches to elements of the project.
They’re pursuing the investigation of the role of women in medieval society with recognition to the fact that there’s a limitation to the amount we know of this society, as our knowledge depends on quite limited sources. The team is aware of the restricted amount of information and acknowledges the findings are based upon a somewhat incomplete dataset. Network analysis will always serve inadequate to a certain extent as there will always be gaps in the dataset.
They team is focused on networking the sources available to them and based off that trying to formulate the narrative on the society, specifically the representation, expectation and role of women. It’s transparently outlined that it’s important to recognise that the dataset is naturally incomplete and the information gathered will inevitably be limited, however in respecting this fact it allows them to extract everything they can from the material that is available.
One of the primary questions the team is looking to explore is the idea of women being connectors of men, often through the literature of the time women tend to have a peace weaver holding a harmonious presence in the stories. Very often however the marriages which are based upon simply resolving conflict have a tendency not to last for a prolonged period of time. The project investigates where women appear in these stories, what their role is as well as what impact they have.
There’s an interesting lack of clarity on the element of names in the stories, as some names are intentionally left out – particularly women’s names. It’s thought that this is due to an element of respect for not naming women if they are still alive but in other times it’s as a sign of insignificance or perhaps it’s some other reasoning altogether which is yet to be discovered.
The project focuses on social networks and dynamic networks, who is connected to who alongside temporal dimensions. Mainly honing in on narrative sources which have a message or integrate story relevant to the projects objectives. Another concern of the project is the idea of change over time, understanding the differences in how women were represented between various periods and how this is translated through the scriptures.
The data gathering element of the project is extensive, focusing on recording all of the characters in a text alongside all of their interactions. Using a spreadsheet to document the name of the character and everyone their connected to as they appear in the text. Distinguishing their gender, if they’re named or unnamed and the types of relationship they have to one another are all documented to provide insight into the social network.
The team is actively engaged in doing a close reading approach in which they hold an extremely admirable standard of attention to detail in their investigation. The level of complexity in which the team is interacting with cannot be accomplished by a computer programme, Dr MacCarron explained that this is due to the high levels of interpretation and deeper levels of understanding required to accurately assemble the information from the stories. As the project developed naturally the information selection process had to be adjusted to give justice to the information the team was exposed to. Adapting the categories is essential and being able to update the criteria as the project unfolded, an all to common concept when formulating this type of data based narrative.
The graph presented to show the findings so far in the project initially seems almost immenitible, understanding the colour key is fundamental to being able to read and begin to interact with the large quantity of information being displayed by the sophisticated graphs.The underlying information behind the graph is what is of value over the display, I’d argue that a proficient level of knowledge on the area or supporting text and documentation is essential in order to understand the intricate graph.
The complexity of the data is relevant to Digital Humanities and working alongside physicists to be able to have a comprehensive understanding of the narrative being formulated from the data and what it means within a complete and broad context. Giving the space to test hypothesis and create and element of ordered chaos, which Digital Humanities scholars have mastered the ability to do.
Through an informal yet highly engaging presentation, Dr David Murphy explained a variety of concepts around VR in an insightful and stimulating way. Giving a colloquium on the knowledge he has gained, being involved in VR since 1992. Beginning with presenting a reality continuum to explain the variety of reality manipulation and where his area of expertise is. We then explored the software and hardware requirements for VR and the various judgement calls that must be made in VR projects. Going on to understand some of the trends and realistic future possibilities for VR/AR.
Starting by presenting a reality continuum, to show the space that he’s working in. On one end of the continuum there is real reality RR and on the other extreme there is virtual reality VR, in between there is a spectrum where merged reality and augmented reality lay. Essentially these are various combinations of reality with computer generated data being overlaid on top of reality or else reality being brought into a virtual synthetic environment. As you begin to develop VR, there are judgement calls which need to be made for your project. The trade offs between various elements.
Beginning with the early developments of VR software and hardware, Murphy explained how initially the software was written specifically for particular graphics cards, systems or headsets. The style of programming is classed as imperative programming building from the ground up, this idea has informed a lot of modern graphics languages. The manner in which one programmes used to be written meant that they were essentially locked to the devices they were intended for and failed to be transferable or useful beyond their initial purpose.
Alternatively there is a declarative approach that describes the intended outcome which lends itself better to VR developments because when creating VR environments, there’s little concern about the implementation details on how it’s done and achieved as this is offloaded to another piece of software or part of ones system. As a programmer one wants the ability to design their system in terms of features, content and how these interact or behave. Outsourcing the other elements gives you the space to focus on what your personal contribution. This opens the development to non programmers as well as this made it intuitive and simple to interact with, with the uptake of declarative languages it gave artists the ability to develop VR systems.
Declarative approaches have evolved over time, starting with Iris systems where they introduced the concept of a scene graph which has since become a crucial part of VR development. A scene graph is essentially a hierarchical description of the content, entities and objects in your scene, and how they relate to each other. There has been different variations since with Inventor going on to be OpenInventor and open standard which later then became an API known as Coin 3D, which is a high-level, retained-mode toolkit for effective graphics development. Alongside this you have object oriented languages like Java 3D which took the concept of scene graphs and declarative styles of description which is said to be a heavier approach which allows you to create a distributable executable.
These languages all typically come together as there are strengths and weaknesses to all of them so the optimal efficiency is met through the combination of the various elements. Combined approaches using procedural and declarative languages in VR has become the mainstay of modern development. The web is more or less the main medium of delivering VR content. Developers must consider how your intended audience will consume your software or content. Hosting on a server and using the web infrastructure to deliver your content allowing them to participate in the experience through a web browser. All one needs to be able to engage in the material is the necessary hardware devices and then a web browser for viewing various content.
Alternatively there are game engines which offer more complete solutions to VR development. They are typically professional grade software development environments, the same tools which are used to develop AAA title games. They offer sophisticated, polished and high standard graphics which you’re then able to leverage however you have to be mindful that these are predominantly proprietary systems, so you must adopt a single game engine and you build your platform out on that. The systems can be difficult to learn and typically very complex, usually only function by having large teams who specify in a particular area with very defined roles.
From personal experience, Murphy strongly advised against using proprietary systems if you’re considering taking on a substantial project as you’re powerless against the future of the system. Instead, using standards based solutions which are ISO standards meaning they will be supported going forward. Whereas game engines, although they’re sophisticated, they are privately owned so the future may be uncertain. Open source game engines exist but are far behind the competitors in terms of quality and refinement.
The hardware environment for VR is developing rapidly, there’s a wide variety of equipment available from the low end inexpensive pieces to those which are considerably expensive at the high end. Commercial headsets which use mobile devices to render VR are relatively inexpensive and quite widely available. It’s a complex and moving space, trends are arising which are pushing towards wireless systems.
There is a more complicated configuration to a true VR experience, more than just a headset VR involves an entire workstation; controllers, displays, spatial sound, haptic interfaces, invisibles and wearable technology. It’s almost impossible to think of VR development in isolation because the technology is situated in quite a dynamic and advanced environment.
In terms of architecture VR isn’t simply one thing, there’s web, mobile, fishtank, desktop, room scale, wide scale and environmental VR. Which essentially describes the application of the VR experience. Taking into account considerations about how the user will be interacting with the system as it’s essential to have this in mind as you’re developing a VR experience. There isn’t a sufficing way to scale VR from one type of mode to another, room scale VR doesn’t condensate well to a seated desktop experience. VR can be designed to be individualised for a singular person or it can be collaborative which provides a social component and normally highly distributable. These are all considerations that need to be addressed at the outset, not after the fact.
Presence is the measure of how much a user is immersed in the experience, ideally VR will engulf the person entirely into the synthetic environment. How present does the participant feel in the VR space or conversely how detatched is the person from reality. There’s passive VR where users simply consume the content, they tend not to be very engaging and it’s difficult to direct the participants attention from the outset and throughout. Navigational or exploratory VR which gives the freedom and ability for the user to move around, they are given an element of agency and they’re actively engaging with their environment.
Immersive VR is when the participant is completely surrounded by the synthetic space on multi modal levels, visual, auditory, haptics, environmental cues and they then become oblivious to the real world. Their senses are so saturated with information that they don’t have the ability to be present in the external environment, the perceptual system is being dominated by the artificial stimulation inside the VR world. Finally there’s interactive VR which essentially builds on immersive VR where the user is a full agent participating in the VR itself but they’re also constructing or manufacturing elements of VR as they’re in the space.
To fully engage someone in VR it’s essential to stimulate the participant as much as possible, based on Aristotle’s classic declaration of the five senses as smell, sight, touch, taste and hearing. VR covers over half of these but there is still major room for further development. Common research trends are expanding their knowledge exponentially, specifically looking to introduce further stimulation of all of our senses. Research labs are actively pursuing artificial smell, touch and taste. If tactile senses, taste and smell can be triggered using VR it will add a deeper dimension to the level of immersion a participant is able to experience.
In terms of proprioception which is known to be a sixth sense, an awareness of the self in an environment, it’s informed by external signals and inputs such as atmospheric pressure, balance and upright gravity. It’s an important consideration for VR as the ideal objective is to have a total immersion into the virtual world meaning total disconnect from real reality.
By reducing and minimising the size and needs of virtual reality systems you naturally broaden the possibilities expand the prospects for usability. Murphy explained how VR has been around since the 1960’s and his involvement began in early 1990. In terms of the hype around VR he explains how roughly every decade the technology becomes popular and so this creates a serge in the awareness of VR. He explains how since the 00s though the attention which VR has received is unlike anything previous, it’s fundamentally different as it’s not driven by science fiction or Hollywood but in fact driven by the industry and it’s the first time it has ever been that way. There has been incredibly significant technological developments that were driven by the market, convergence of technology, miniaturization, improvements in power consumption and most importantly, consumers are willing to accept new technology. There is a readiness to embrace and take on new technology, it has become pervasive and it’s not going to be going anywhere any time soon.
Murphy introduced the Gartner Hype Cycle 2018 model which provides a graphic representation of the maturity and adoption of technologies and applications, and how they are potentially relevant to solving real business problems and exploiting new opportunities. At the moment, augmented reality is in the trough of disillusionment as people are disappointed with the developments in AR. There’s still high expectations in relation to VR and Murphy proposes that the issue isn’t with the technology but simply the richness of the available content. There’s a huge need for people to actually develop the content to be able to bring VR to the next level. However, integrity as Murphy explained is crucial, false claims as to the possibilities for AR/VR can be incredibly dangerous, especially in terms of its involvement in medical, safety or dangerous situations.
Ericsson identified three fundamental paradoxes of VR which Murphy outlined to us briefly. Firstly mobility, VR allows you to go anywhere however due to the large amounts of computational workstation needs you cannot take VR anywhere. Secondly isolation, it allows you to socialise with anyone in the world however physically you are on your own, perhaps it will allow for an even further level of disconnection from society. Lastly is integration, those who are socially challenged in the real world often are the ones who are more socially active in VR, this can be argued as a positive thing as they have a place and purpose however it doesn’t address or solve the real problem.
To round up Murphy left very interesting parting thoughts on responsible VR, there are social concerns with this new false world. In VR you have the availability to join online communities people who have similar traits married with a whole new set of social norms and social rules which are not necessarily in line with those of the real world. The normailities of an online society are determined by each community and the members which make up that community. There could be a space created which not only tolerate violence, bullying and abuse but could actively encourage such behaviours. As the boundaries between the virtual world and the real world are blurring there is huge concern and substantial social issues we need to acknowledge as the advancements in this area are developing so rapidly.
There’s also psychological concerns as there has been reports of participants showing signs of PTSD after VR experiences. The premise is very important to understand, the purpose of VR is to have the user fully immersed in the synthetic environment and by manipulating and stimulating their senses for them to truly believe that what they are experiencing is real. You are going to get the same visceral response in VR as if you were present in the real world. Therefore there is major concerns in relation to psychological well being of VR users going forward.
Catholicism has a long history in Ireland and continues to influence and adapt to Irish society. For some, Catholicism acts as a cultural identity as well as a religious identity. This may contribute to the fact that many Irish people, including those who rarely attend church, observe the traditional Catholic life-cycle rituals, particularly baptism and confirmation.
While Ireland remains a predominantly Catholic country, 3.7 million people identified as Catholic in the 2016 census, 132,220 fewer than in 2011 when the percentage stood at 84%. In this data narrative I intend to use various figures and data gathered from the Central Statistics Office alongside the European Social Survey to explore the practice and belief among Catholics in the Republic of Ireland.
The Catholic Church continues to play a prominent role in the country through maintaining responsibility for most schools and many hospitals. The Catholic Church runs 90% of state-funded primary schools and around half of all secondary schools. However, some argue that baptism is still widely practised only because many Catholic primary schools give preference to the enrolment of children who are already baptised. In turn, many non-religious parents will baptise their children to avoid having to seek schools that are farther from their homes. Nonetheless, Catholicism continues to play a notable role in Irish society and Irish national identity.
In recent decades, Ireland has experienced a significant decline in the number of regular religious practitioners. This decrease corresponded with the rapid economic growth of the country in the 1990s, and the exposure of child abuse by Catholic clergy that came to light in the early 21st century. There also appears to be a growing generational divide, whereby many of the older population uphold the views held by the church.
Looking back, census results show that historically Roman Catholics represented on average of 89.5 percent of the population in each of the four censuses held from 1881 to 1911. It subsequently rose to a peak in 1961 of 94.9 per cent. Since then, its proportion of the total population has slowly declined.
While the proportion of Catholics declined in 2016, the total number also recorded a fall of 132,220 persons from 3.86 million in 2011 to 3.73 million in 2016, the first such fall in absolute numbers since at least five decades. There has been a corresponding rise in the number with no religion which grew by 73.6 percent from 269,800 to 468,400, an increase of 198,600.
One in 10 Irish people say they have no religion which is 468,421 people, a 73.6% increase since 2011. This makes ‘no religion’ the second largest group in this category behind Roman Catholics. Around 12% of persons aged 30-34 have no religious adherence, the highest of any age band.
Over the period 1972-2011, weekly church attendance by Irish Roman Catholics fell from 91% to 30%. For the population as a whole, the following graph details the decline in attendance.
In 2008, it was reported that there had been a steadying in the rate of decline of the proportion of Catholics in Ireland attending Mass weekly or more often. Weekly or more often Mass attendance was declining from the late 1980s but had levelled off at 64% of Catholics by the late 1990s. In 2006 the ESS data showed that weekly or more often Mass attendance in the Republic currently stands at 56.4% of the Catholic population.
However, proportion of regular Mass attendees is not evenly distributed across the age range, the provinces or even the occupations. From the table below we can note some interesting regional patterns. Those Catholics who never attend Mass is highest in the Dublin area at 4.5% but this region also sees the highest proportion of those who attend every day. The Once per week proportion in this region is the lowest of the entire State, just under one quarter of Dublin’s Catholics attend on this basis. There is nothing to suggest that living in these areas means you are a less frequent attendee.
Attendance at religious services apart from special occasions by province. Base: RoI Catholics. Source: ESS4.
Three counties had more than 1 in 3 of the population as non-Catholic, namely Dublin City, Dun Laoghaire and Galway City. Tipperary had the lowest percentage at 12.9%.
The percentage of respondents who said they followed a religion other than Catholicism in the census in Ireland in 2011 is outlined in the map below.
This information is coherent with the idea that busier cities with a higher population density tend to have a more complex variation of religion. It’s also clear that rural areas show a substantially lower amount of following to other religions aside from Catholicism.
For those Catholics that attend more than once per week, we can see significant declines over an approximately ten year period. There is a reduction of 8% in the number of Catholics attending Mass once per week only. If age is factored into this data, we can see a more nuanced trend. Once per week or more often Mass attendance broken down by broad age groups. Base: RoI Catholics. Source: ESS cumulative file.
There is a consistent fall in once per week or more often Mass attendance among all age groups bar two in the period under examination. In 2002, about 50% of 15 to 24 year olds attend Mass this often. By 2009, this frequency rate is about 30% for this age group. This is represented by the blue and green lines in the first set of columns above. Rises are falls across the age groups are recorded but the trend is downward across this time period for all but two age groups: the 55 to 64 and 75 or older age groups.
This is confirmed by comparing the linear regression values for a log scale trendline for two selected age groups. This is not so much a predictor of the trend but a confirmation of the trend, i.e. downward for the younger age group. The model proposed suggests that there will be a continued downward trend in the once per week Mass attendance for the younger age group and a continuing stabilisation of the trend for the older.
Larger numbers of Catholics in Ireland feel that they are religious than not very religious. If these data are examined by age, there is a continuing trend toward younger cohorts of people believing themselves to be not so religious. However, those who define themselves as very religious also show some relevant trends.
The chart below shows the proportions in each of the age groups and their definition of themselves as religious. The vertical axis represents proportions of Catholics in that age cohort. As can be seen, those aged 55 and above are far more likely to define themselves as more religious than those aged under 35, even among those higher up on the on the scale. The taller bars on the right as well as the blue bars indicate larger proportions of Catholics in that cohort choosing more religious definitions of themselves.
The green lines above mark the least ‘most religious’ in the graph with those marking the final point on the scale increasing with age. Over time, as the percentage of the entire population describing themselves as Catholic decreases, the proportions within the Catholic population defining themselves as religious or very religious increases with age. As before, both the differences in the region of residence and the gender of the respondent are significant to the sense of how religious the respondent feels themselves to be.
To further illustrate this idea, by taking the total population for 2016 from the CSO alongside the figures for those practicing no religion and those who count themselves as Roman Catholics there is a very clear and coherent message being narrated through the data.
Initially focusing on the fact that the highest declared Catholics throughout the census are children under nine years. Arguably this is due to the influence of the Catholic church in primary schools in Ireland and the sacraments such as Baptism, Communion and Conformation being a substantial part of our education system as well as our cultural norms, particularly at primary school level. Following this, there is a sharp decrease in those declaring themselves as Roman Catholics and understandably an equated shift in those practicing no religion.
The intersection of the figures with those in their early fifties suggests this was the time when the dissolution of the Catholic church began. Supported by the fact that from this point the number of practicing Catholics steadily increases taking the highest percentage of the population in their later years in life.
The narrative being brought forward through the data is extremely clear, there is an obvious reform taking place within the Catholic Church in Ireland. The figures clearly illustrate the steady decline of catholic practitioners alongside the general dissolution of faith across Ireland. Such figures, however, only get us so far in historically analysing the state of the Catholic Church in Ireland. Catholicism has had an extensive impact on Irish culture for many generations, and although in Ireland, there is no official state religion, and the Irish Constitution guarantees the individual’s freedom to profess and practise a religion. Nonetheless, the Catholic Church and the Irish state have a longstanding historical, cultural and political connection.
The rich data surrounding the practice and belief among Catholics in the Republic of Ireland allows us to develop a deeper understanding around the changes facing our society. Alongside being able to diagnose the information, it can also create a space to predict where the future of our cultural society will go and perhaps what the impacts of these changes will be from a socioeconomic and cultural perspective.
Defining digital humanities has been one of the most common concerns held throughout the discipline. Having countless definitions and individual interpretations, alongside multiple contributions which ironically encapsulate what the digital humanities are. Following the natural breakdown of defining anything, I initially explore what the terms digital and humanities imply extended into what they mean together. Following this, exploring the origins of the discipline and how it came to be. Going on to focus on defining digital humanities as an academic – what the digital humanities are and what they are not. Finally, where the future of DH is headed and how the current definitions may develop. Rapid changes in technology, as well as the dynamic nature of humanitarian thought, could perhaps give an explanation as to why there is no concrete definition for DH and why the debate has been such a crucial part of the digital humanities.
Beginning to try to understand what the digital humanities is, would naturally trigger a need to know how traditional humanities as well as the term digital are defined, in their own right, and then how they come together. “The term ‘humanities’ includes, but is not limited to, the study and interpretation of the following: language, both modern and classical; linguistics; literature; history; jurisprudence; philosophy; archaeology; comparative religion; ethics; the history, criticism and theory of the arts; those aspects of social sciences which have humanitarian content and employ humanitarian methods; and the study and application of the humanities to the human environment with particular attention to reflecting our diverse heritage, traditions, and history and to the relevance of the humanities to the current conditions of national life.” (National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act, 1965) Comprehensively encapsulating the traditional aspects of humanities.
While the dictionary definition of digital describes the branch of scientific or engineering knowledge that deals with the creation and practical use of digital or computerized devices, methods, systems and the application of this knowledge for practical ends. Combining computational elements with the traditional definition for humanities could almost be considered a contradiction in terms. De-humanizing the humanities and bringing a human element to the quantitative nature of the digital world. Computer sciences more specifically sciences as a whole come from a place of skepticism whereas the humanities originate from the idea of criticism. However, this is where they share a commonality in how questions and solutions surround the fundamental ideas around a lot of their work. This, in fact, gives us an idea of where the definition lies for digital humanities, the intersection between the digital and traditional humanities. It is respectfully defined by the opportunities and challenges that arise from trying to form a new collective singular.
Looking at the origin of the digital humanities allows us to develop an understanding of how it came to be, giving us a deeper appreciation for what now defines DH. The initial practices emerged from the creation of an automated approach to computer-generated concordance to the writings of Thomas Aquinas. Continuing to use mainframe computing to automate tasks such as word-searching, sorting, counting, and listing, scholars could process textual corpora on a scale unthinkable with prior methods that relied on handwritten or typed index cards. Following the idea of bringing elements of traditional humanities and modern computing technologies. This marriage continued as technological advances such as XML and TEI revolutionized the way we interact with traditional humanitarian practices. The development and history behind the discipline are essential to defining digital humanities as it gives a knowledge of our origins. Space was created for the rapidly expanding technological advances to collide with humanities disciplines.
Following on from this, focusing on the present day realities of what the digital humanities are, is essential. As we enter a world where digital literacy is becoming such a normality there is a definite need to be able to distinguish between how computing is integrated into digital humanities more than in other disciplines. The digital humanities have moved away from textual analysis, encoding and mark up and toward an entirely new disciplinary paradigm, convergent fields, hybrid methodologies. Although all of these aspects are fundamental to our discipline their function is becoming redundant. A huge amount of information is accessible through online resources and academic material is becoming digitized. The normality of having an intersection between academia and technology calls for an explicit definition of what distinguishes digital humanitarians from the modern day digitally literate scholar. Seeing the field as the evolution of traditional humanitarian studies, making use of the tools available to us in order to study and explore the limits of the human condition.
Looking at the boundaries for what DH is from an academic perspective gives insight into what digital humanities is defined as for present scholars as well as future digital humanitarians. It allows the gap for an explanation to what the nature of study will be and what the academic duties you will hold in pursuing a degree in DH. We acknowledge that the humanities are a vibrant set of disciplines and subdisciplines that has always had good currency over time – always changing, always reflecting at the nature of the human experience over time via the representation of that experience in its material manifestations. Alongside this, we consider computation or the digital, itself, as a grouping of methods, approaches, technologies, and tools that are themselves dynamically and continually changing.
Bringing the two known parameters of the humanities and technological degrees, presenting a definition for what digital humanities is as a course of study. Even though a full, accurate, comprehensive, and fixed definition of the digital humanities may be elusive, we need to at least have enough of an understanding of what the digital humanities are, in order to be able to move forward and present clarity in the explanation for potential younger generations. Which need to have the incentive to study and inadvertently expand the digital humanities as a whole. Digital humanities in this context gives a definition of a degree where students develop practical skills to flourish in the digital age and explore the impact of digital technology on culture, power, and identity in society. Seeking to discover what is it to be human in the digital age, and the answers will help to shape how we see ourselves and others as humanity becomes more connected by technology. Bringing a grounded and simplified explanation to the complexity of what digital humanities are.
Furthermore, the areas of study as you become introduced and start your academic life as a digital humanitarian are crucial to understanding how DH is defined. The discipline has been formalized across third-level institutions as “Digital Arts and Humanities,” as opposed to merely “Digital Humanities.” Critically important in this Irish instance of the digital humanities phenomenon is the Arts component and the impact of this additional discipline. Balancing the computational components necessary to satisfy the digital side of DH with an Arts elective to incorporate traditional humanities. Intersecting with various elements of digital tools & methodologies, student learning in the digital age and concepts and collaboration in digital humanities. To a certain extent, the future of the digital humanities is sculpted by the contributions of the forthcoming academics entering the field, which in turn will eventually become crucial parts of DH and undoubtedly bring about a whole new variety to the definitions it carries.
Despite prevailingly progressive narratives surrounding the impact of digital technology on modern academic culture, the field of digital humanities is characterized at a deeper level by a more critical engagement with technology. Critical inquiry using computational methods to develop understanding and have the ability to research beyond average capabilities is what sets digital humanities apart. Being able to evaluate sources, use digital tools and research methods as well as a comprehensive understanding of the systems you use distinguishes traditional humanitarians from digital humanitarians. Likewise having the ability to use critic and thoughtful questioning sets digital humanitarians apart from computer scientists.
In addition to this, having an understanding of what the digital humanities are, naturally requires insight into what the digital humanities are not. For if it is so many things, and encompasses so many ideas, how can it be anything? “Digital Humanities is not some airy Lyceum. It is a series of concrete instantiations involving money, students, funding agencies, big schools, little schools, programs, curricula, old guards, new guards, gatekeepers, and prestige. It might be more than these things, but it cannot not be these things” Ramsey proposes that there is a tangible and concrete reality to what the digital humanities are. It’s built upon the various components but these do not actually create it. It’s scaffolding rather than the “thing” itself. He created a silence in the noise of the debates as he outlined what digital humanities is not. By providing a boundary, it creates a distinction between what is included in the definition and what is not. Even though there is a vast and inconclusive explanation to what the digital humanities are, knowing what it is not is crucial.
Additionally, as we continue to formulate answers to the question which has become a fundamental part of our discipline. There is a constant change, a constant reform and development. Technology is expanding at phenomenal rates and doesn’t seem as if it will cease any time soon. The attraction to the digital nature of the field will undeniably become more and more valuable as humans take their place in adapting to our new technologically saturated environment. This will then sculpt how digital humanities will be defined in the future. We are now, as digital humanitarians, defining the field for ourselves but also for future generations. The work and teachings we engage in are going to become part of the very definition we are currently trying to understand. Individual components making up the discipline as a whole, collectively creating and defining ourselves – both individual as well as collaborative, interpretations and contributions.
Furthermore, for a definition to be challenged depending on who is reading, writing or hearing it goes against the nature of having a truly complete definition. There are countless interpretations out there for what people perceive the digital humanities to be. Personally, I’ve come to understand it as the use of digital media and technology, to advance the full range of thought and practice in the humanities, from the creation of scholarly resources to research on those resources, to the communication of results to colleagues and fellow students. As it takes the traditional aspects of the humanities namely research, teaching and learning in areas of traditional arts but does this in digital ways. Making and using computer software, websites and mobile phone apps to teach, or to help researchers and learners. Simply, bringing computational methods to bear on traditional humanities scholarship.
The attempt to form a comprehensive answer to how digital humanities is defined continues to be a rich source of intellectual debate. It doesn’t seem to be coming to a reasonable conclusion any time soon which feeds to the very idea of what the digital humanities are. Exploring the terms digital and humanities themselves, how one understands each individually and how these then come together. The origins of the discipline as well as the academic characterization which it carries. All playing crucial parts of developing an understanding of what the digital humanities are. It is the point of intersection of humanities and computation – itself dynamic and changing like the elements it brings together.
Works Cited
“About the National Endowment for the Humanities.” National Endowment for the Humanities, www.neh.gov/about.
Battershill, Claire, and Shawna Ross. Using Digital Humanities in the Classroom: a Practical Introduction for Teachers, Lecturers, and Students. Bloomsbury Academic, 2017.
Berry, David M. Understanding Digital Humanities. Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.
Burdick, Anne, et al. Digital-Humanities. The MIT Press, 2016.
Crompton, Constance, et al. Doing Digital Humanities: Practice, Training, Research. Routledge, 2016.
“Digital Humanities and Information Technology.” University College Cork, www.ucc.ie/en/ck118/.
“Digital Humanities: Defining Digital Humanities.” LibGuides, guides.library.duke.edu/digital_humanities#s-lg-box-9927973.
“Evolution of Virtual Economies.” Virtual Economies and Financial Crime, doi:10.4337/9781849809337.00010.
Gold, Matthew K. Debates in the Digital Humanities. University of Minnesota Press, 2012.
Gold, Matthew K., and Lauren F. Klein. Debates in the Digital Humanities: 2016. University of Minnesota Press.
“The Productive Unease of 21st-Century Digital Scholarship.” A Companion to Digital Literary Studies, www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/3/3/000055/000055.html.
Schnapp, Jeffrey, and Maria Grazia. Mattei. Digital Humanities. EGEA, 2015.
University Communications, and University of Notre Dame. “Breac.” Cú Chulainn Down Under: Peter Carey’s True History of the Kelly Gang and the Ambivalences of Diasporic Irish Identity Construction in Australia // Articles // Breac // University of Notre Dame, breac.nd.edu/articles/the-emergence-of-the-digital-humanities-in-ireland/.
This blog was inspired by my wonderful nana mo. I hadn’t seen her in almost two months because I’m in college full time and work every weekend. I call her at least three times a week and she always tells me how much she wishes she could give me a hug and see me face to face. As far as technology goes I don’t think it’s advanced to virtual cuddles. However, it’s almost old news that you can talk to someone face to face through things like Skype and FaceTime.
After trying to explain to my darling nana the idea of video calls for about 40 minutes I knew I wasn’t getting anywhere. So I got on to my 7 year old sister to run down to her house with an IPad and I promised I was going to call her back on Facetime 20 minutes later. If there was ever a moment I wished I could see again and again it’s the pure golden confusion on my nanas face when my sister answered the facetime call from me and I was on the screen talking and laughing in live time. After another 15 minuets of broken conversation because of all the “poor connection” and “video will resume shortly” she decided she needed a nap.
When the call ended it made me totally rethink some of my ideas of technology and I started to explore how different aspects of technology have become so normal for us but remain completely alien to someone like my nana who struggles to leave her house once every two weeks. She’s not exposed to the rapidly developing world of technology in any way, she even struggles to use her microwave. I haven’t stopped thinking about it and it’s inspired me to write a series of blogs relating to the impact of technology. The good the bad and the ugly. I want to explore its presence through all ages and through all generations. From the over 75’s inspired by my darling nana to its impact in the life of my gorgeous 7 year old sister who navigates her way through IPhones and IPads better than me.
I wake up to the sound of my alarm which I set through the “bedtime” app on my phone. I pick up my phone before I even turn on a light or put on my glasses and scroll through my social media feeds for at least 10 minutes with one eye open and the other closed and still pressed against my pillow. After wasting a sufficient amount of time aimlessly scrolling through my phone I get up, wash my face with my Clarisonic cleansing brush, and brushing my teeth for 4 minutes with my electric toothbrush. Within the first 20 minutes of making up I am already exposed to huge technology. Making an already easy life, even easier.
Following this I continue my morning drowning in technology. By 9am I scan in to the lecture with my smartcard, pull up the slides on my tablet and follow the projector to the second. If I hadn’t already met up with my girlfriends I text them or location share to make sure we see each other after the lecture. We go to get coffee out of the self-service machine using our smartcards to pay with invisible money again. When we finish a day of college I normally go to work, I check the due time on my phone through an app and then jump on the next one into town. I swipe on with my leapcard, put in my headphones and head to work.
Unsurprisingly technology embedded throughout all aspects of work life. I work in retail and know for a fact that our whole system won’t function without technology and suffers greatly when our internet connection is weak. Our tills are all electronic, we use security radios, stock check scanners, electronic card payment systems and independent air conditioning systems. These are just an example of the digitally dependent system in my workplace. Finally after work I head home. For the purpose of this blog I observed closely how much technology I was exposed to on a daily basis and the amount that I realized surrounded me was extraordinary and provoked me to want to do a tech detox.
I began to explore the relationship between over exposure to technology and different aspects of our lives. All the way from psychological to physiological. Although this is my current routine and the levels of technology exposure remains constant enough, it hasn’t been like this all my life. I feel like this just confirms further the idea of how much rapidly developing technology is effecting our lives. Whether that affect be good, bad or indifferent.
It’s no secret that a certain level of digital literacy is an essential element in our lives in this generation, by definition digital literacy is the knowledge, skills, and behaviors used in a broad range of digital devices such as smartphones, tablets, laptops and desktop PCs, all of which are seen as a network rather than computing devices (Wikipedia). This definition is extremely important in understanding what it means in our current age to be digitally literate.
This is going to get slightly academic so if you’re here for lighter reading follow this this link for a softer blog post!
When I started to look a little bit deeper into how essential it is to be digitally literate, the research and knowledge I came across suggested that my previous thoughts were way off the mark. I knew that it was important, through a various parts of our lives, academic, social, personal and professional. There is almost no escaping the digitization of this world, technology is everywhere. If this idea is something that interests you I focused on my own personal digital saturation here.
I’m going to concentrate on how this type of literacy is so important in each of these categories. Firstly academic, there is a rapidly developing need for us as students to be able to use computers, laptops and tablets. Assignments are commonly handed in online, material covered in lectures is available online, the fastest way to contact lecturers and find out any updates about lecture times and locations, yep you guessed it, online. In the course I’m studying specifically as well it’s a huge help to be connected through social media specifically twitter where we all share content using the #UCCDH. Brilliance.
Next and equally importantly, having a common standard of digital literacy has become almost essential for us in our social lives. Social media has become one of the main types of communication. To be very honest can’t even remember the last time I posted a letter or postcard! Not only for internet use but having the ability to use your smartcard is a pure necessity. Calling, texting, voicemails all very basic but all require at least a minimal amount of digital knowledge.
By definition it states that behaviour is also considered an essential part of being digitally literate. When doing research on this I found this extremely interesting. How does one judge if someone’s behaviour is acceptable or not when it come to the use of digital tech? it surely depends on individual standards and morals etc. but there it is in definition.
Being digitally literate is going to constantly change and develop as our continuously changing digital world changes. We as a generation compared to those before us, undoubtedly have a higher level of digital knowledge purely because this is what we have been exposed to. We are all creatures of habit after all. Is this ease of use of digital technology hindering our traditional literacy? Are we going to become fully dependent on technology in these areas of our lives? Is this change welcomes? Big questions.
Crowdsourcing is the connective sharing of knowledge, people-powered research defined as “participatory online activity with a specific aim.” It is the practice of engaging a crowd or group for a common goal, often innovation, problem solving or efficiency. This offers significant value in being able to broaden our understanding of particular areas, as contributors can easily and efficiently share their knowledge. Crowdsourcing can allow organisations and institutions access to new ideas, possible solutions, optimisation of tasks as well as the potential for reduced costs. Especially with the improved connectivity of today’s society, it is now even easier than ever for individuals to collectively contribute their time, expertise or ideas to a project or cause.
The purpose of projects on online spaces such as Zooniverse is generally in identifying particular digital objects and attempting to establish provenance so that people can actually use these as artefacts. Not only in research but for greater future development and enrichment of knowledge on this particular area. The initial process of getting involved in a crowdsourced project was signing up to Zooniverse and sifting through various projects, understanding the aims of the project alongside what would be involved as a contributor.
After researching into various projects, the one which stood out by far was SONYC – Sounds Of New York City. Choosing this for numerous reasons, mainly due to personal interest in the social sciences alongside my minor in Economics which has led me to have a huge interest of societal impacts of decisions made by organisations and institutions. I also felt my expertise from past electives such as Digital Media and Multimedia gave me a substantial base of knowledge to be able to contribute to the project in an informed and productive way.
The Process Involved
The process involved in contributing to the project begins with some information about the purpose of the work SONYC are doing explaining their mission is. There is a detailed guide following this which goes through, step by step, what tasks are involved in contributing to the project.
Initial instruction is to find a quiet place with minimal background noise or else to use headphones if possible. Then you will find a list of sound sources which you use to label and identify in the 10 second recording which you will be presented with. It’s noted to ensure you’re familiar with the descriptions of each sound to enable you to make the best choice when identifying various clips.
You will also see a spectrogram visualization of the sound recording, which is linked to player used to listen to the audio. When you click the play button to listen to the recording, a red line will indicate the corresponding position in the spectrogram visualization. This correspondence will help in identifying sounds.
The task requires you to try to identify the sounds you hear in the recording, and select each of the appropriate labels from the list as well as what kind of proximity the sound seems to be, choosing either near or far. There’s also an outline as to what you should do if you are having difficulty identifying the sound and explain how differences in the spectrogram may help disambiguate some classes.
If you’re unsure there is a guide which shows you detailed descriptions as well as examples of the different sound sources listed, in order for you to be able to compare and identify the sounds efficiently. Finally you finish and submit your response, you can choose to comment and discuss your work and findings or else continue on listening to further clips. As I went through the sounds I annotated what I heard to hopefully add value and more extensive feedback.
The Implications Of Participating
In helping to identify various urban soundscapes recorded by the sensors deployed across NYC by participating in this project, I have become one of the 962 Volunteers who collectively have completed 8,213 subjects. This project involves large-scale noise monitoring leverages the latest in machine learning technology, big data analysis, and citizen science reporting to more effectively monitor, analyze, and mitigate urban noise pollution.
The tasks I take upon myself will be able to aid the sensors which have been installed on NYC buildings and locations to record street sounds will then help to recognize and differentiate between different types of noise. Using a highly advanced algorithm and artificial intelligence protocols the aim is that this will eventually allow the data to be used to have concrete information about the noise pollution. Including what the noises are, when they occur and to what extent they impact various aspects of everyday life as well.
SONYC provides new and exciting data-science methods for large-scale noise analysis, including predictive noise modeling in off-network locations using spatial statistics and physical modeling, development of interactive 3D visualizations of noise activity across time and space to enable better understanding of noise patterns, and novel information-retrieval tools that exploit the topology of noise events to facilitate search and discovery.
This sensing and analysis has the ability to improve mitigation in two ways. Firstly by enabling optimized, data-driven planning and scheduling of inspections by the local government, making it more likely any violations will be detected and consequences be enforced. Secondly, by increasing the flow of information to those in a position to control emissions like building and construction-site managers, drivers, and neighbors providing credible incentives for self-regulation.
The SONYC project is currently in the third of five years of its research and development agenda. It’s initial focus was on developing and deploying intelligent sensing infrastructure but has progressively moved toward analytics and mitigation in collaboration with city agencies and other stakeholders. The implications of the extensive amounts of knowledge built through this project has huge socioeconomic impacts which are very exciting to be a part of.
The technology will be able to support novel scholarly work on the effects of noise pollution on public health, public policy, environmental psychology, and economics. But the project is far from purely scholarly. By seeking to improve urban-noise mitigation, a critical quality-of-life issue, SONYC promises to benefit urban citizens worldwide. In involving myself in this project and bringing the information I have gathered throughout the years academically, as well as my own accumulated knowledge I was able to contribute to an incredibly impactful project.
Learning From The Experience
The experience of being able to share my limited expertise in a way which could potentially have such an extensive impact on the world around us I found to be both is gratifying and rewarding. The tasks in themselves were simple to complete and the easy to follow making the whole process enjoyable.
Having participated in a few crowdsourcing and collaborative projects, I found SONYC to be one of my favourite to contribute to by far.The contribution of my work on such a phenomenal project has potentially had an impact on the socioeconomic behaviours of the Economy as a whole. The information gathered has the ability to influence decisions of huge government bodies, city agents as well as various private initiatives that provide access to existing infrastructure in the city. Thus making it an exciting project to be involved in and knowing there could potentially be extensive benefits to come from this type of UGC is very rewarding.
In taking what I have learned, I feel it’s of utmost importance to ensure you carefully choose the projects you contribute to. Although my knowledge was by no means extensive I did feel as though the work that I was able to do was impactful because of what I have already learned about sound analytics and various media knowledge as well. Going forward, I will undoubtedly participate in future projects which I feel align with my expertise and interests. The amount of value one can bring depends on both of these in my own opinion.
Future Application
The other part of what i have taken from the project is more about the actual tools and materials I was exposed to. Sound analysis, audio visual displays and categorization are all things which have broadened my understanding of this type of media. Alongside being able to now differentiate various sounds and categorize them accordingly, I feel as though I also have a greater knowledge of how various environmental factors impact various decision making process made by various government bodies as well which is something I can carry through with my studies in Microeconomics.
Overall, participating in a crowdsourcing project such as this I find to hold a huge amount of value and would encourage everyone to get involved. Ensuring you have an interest in what it is you choose to contribute to as well as having clarity as to what the impact of your work will be. I’d strongly recommend a visit to Zooniverse to browse through the various projects there and find one which interests or excites you. UGC is the future of knowledge sharing and will undoubtedly become an essential part of our digital academic research going forward.
I was extremely enthusiastic at this task which we were presented with during one of our DH lectures. We were introduced initially to the ideas behind MapSwipe which I was very intrigued to learn about. I downloaded the app almost immediately and began to go through the processes involved as a new user. It was a tool which I had never used before so tried to learn as much as possible, as quickly as possible. The design of the app I found to be very user friendly and although I consider myself digitally literate I would have no doubt that someone who wouldn’t be as exposed to digital life as much as I have been, would still have no problems in becoming familiar with the designs and features of the app.
Initially when you launch the app you’re greeted with images and messages explaining very simply the purpose of the app, alongside a quick introduction of the responsibility you have gained as a new user. The first image pops up with text reading “You receive groups of satellite images from vulnerable areas” outlining what to expect as you start your MapSwipe journey. Then swiping left you are shown another image with the text “The data helps organisations coordinate humanitarian efforts in the places you map” giving you an understanding of the purpose of the app. Then lastly a third image with the text “Mapping has already helped save lives. Are you ready to become a mobile volunteer?” motivating me as a user to start my experience using Mapswipe.
Then I was given a choice of three tiles each containing an area which “needs mapping”. I chose “Nigeria for MSF 4” and was then given clear and concise instructions as to what to do next. I tapped the tile which brought me to a more in depth tutorial to gather as much information as possible and ensure my knowledge as a user was as thorough as possible. The tutorial explained the different types of buildings you’re able to see from the satellite images, the different roads and how to spot them as well as rivers and river beds. I found the tutorial extremely valuable and found myself returning to it frequently as I continued using the app.
Over the next few weeks I mapped all types of areas and found myself becoming more and more comfortable using the app. To be honest I enjoyed using it so much I started to spend long periods of time on it treating it almost like a gaming app! It is so simple and easy to use with fantastic user friendly features which undoubtedly helped to keep me as a user, extremely interested and interactive. The idea behind MapSwipe is incredible and personally I am so impressed by how brilliantly it was designed. It’s putting peoples time to good use and every aspect of the app is beneficial. It’s amazing to see how technology can be used in such a productive way and gave me a deeper understanding of the importance of user generated content.
I have no doubt that I will be able to use the crowd-sourced initiative in my own works in the future. As long as you have a user friendly and interactive design there are endless ways to use this invaluable tool. I have a strong passion for all aspects involving social media and using it as both an aid for providing information as well as a platform for digital marketing. MapSwipe primarily provides vast amounts of knowledge for good cause and is beneficial in so many ways. For medical aid especially, knowing a basic structure of an area through these maps can save lives.
After a lengthy amount of my time being wrapped up in MapSwipe and researching the background alongside the future plans for them I started to look into the other aspect of the task HOTOSM. The Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team. Initially as I began to research it they seemed to hold extremely similar ideas as MapSwipe in that they are a worldwide non-profit organisation originally from the US. They focus on how valuable it is to have free, up-to-date maps when relief organizations are responding to disasters or political disasters (https://www.hotosm.org/about). My first impressions were that it was notably less user friendly and took a longer to gain access and begin mapping where as MapSwipe took only a matter of minutes. I was intrigued to learn about how the Team at OpenStreetMap are trying to develop new technology to serve the humanitarian and open data communities which is something I would be very interested in. I got the impression that it was a much bigger company and is well established. I read into a small bit about the organisation and the structure within the community which helps me form a better understanding. Overall the ideas carried through both MapSwipe and HOTOSM are very admirable and everything about both is purely beneficial to everyone involved.
As a volunteer myself I have worked with Thrive Africa, St.Vincent de Paul as well as SUAS as a literacy support mentor. I am very aware of how much work is involved as a volunteer and how essential it is for as many people to be involved in projects like this to give as much support as possible. I have been to Ghana and Botswana with Thrive Africa and understand completely how much help is needed in various areas over there and was delighted to contribute anything I could on my side using HOTOSM and MapSwipe. I have no doubt that even small amounts of mapping helps enormously. As well as this side of the projects, I have also learned a huge amount about the importance of user generated content and how technology is enabling us as a DH community to put our time to good use. This excites me enormously for my future as I further my studies in Digital Humanities.
Throughout these past number of weeks, I must admit I thoroughly enjoyed learning a huge amount about these organisations. I have huge admiration for the work involved in projects like this. It’s amazing to see how useful technology can be when put to good use. For me personally, the ideas behind both HOTOSM and MapSwipe are the pinacol of the positivity that can be brought about through Digital Humanities. It has opened my mind to how grateful I am to be part of this community and excites me enormously for the future.
