Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship: Past, Current and Future Research

Research output: Contribution to book/anthology/report/conference proceedingConference abstract in proceedingResearchpeer-review

Abstract

The critical problem for understanding the societal impact of humanities scholarship is that we currently have no satisfactory tools for understanding how wider social impacts occur and, by implication, very few guidelines for stimulating a reflexive dialogue about the influence of the humanities in society. An important assumption in this paper is that impact should be studied both from conceptual, qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Any approach that focuses merely on scientific outputs (such as publications or citations) or that relies on purely bibliometric indicators will result in an incomplete and hence misleading picture of research outcomes and their causality. In this paper, I explore how the emerging research impact agenda is embarking on the humanities and which tools and frameworks are available for tracing and mapping the impact of humanities breakthroughs in society. Examining both quantitative and qualitative tools, the paper argues that we need a better and more comprehensive understanding of the role the humanities as part of a wider web of societal institutions, networks, and agents. Granted that the impact of humanities breakthroughs cannot be located at clearly demarcated or specified units, but takes place along a continuum of dynamic exchanges among multiple agents and institutions, I introduce the term “dynamic artifacts” as the main vehicle for understanding research impact in the humanities. Such artifacts consist of datasets, ideas, analyses, performances or engagement but they rarely take the form of “fixed artifacts” such as patents, intellectual property, contracts or documents trails, which hitherto has been the standard for assessing scientific breakthroughs. Having established this distinction between fixed and dynamic artifacts the paper concludes by showing how the impact of humanities can be traced by utilizing different methods such as impact narratives, altmetrics, network analysis, co-creation and ethnographic fieldwork.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Making of the Humanities Confence V : 5-7 October 2016, Johns Hopkins University
Number of pages1
Place of PublicationBaltimore, Maryland
Publication date6 Oct 2016
Pages45
Publication statusPublished - 6 Oct 2016
EventThe Making of Humanities V - Baltimore, United States
Duration: 5 Oct 20167 Oct 2016
Conference number: V

Conference

ConferenceThe Making of Humanities V
Number V
CountryUnited States
City Baltimore
Period05/10/201607/10/2016

Fingerprint

artifact
impact research
intellectual property
network analysis
causality
social effects
patent
dialogue
narrative
performance
Society

Cite this

Pedersen, D. B., & Johansson, L. G. (2016). Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship: Past, Current and Future Research. In The Making of the Humanities Confence V: 5-7 October 2016, Johns Hopkins University (pp. 45). Baltimore, Maryland.
Pedersen, David Budtz ; Johansson, Lasse Gøhler. / Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship : Past, Current and Future Research. The Making of the Humanities Confence V: 5-7 October 2016, Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore, Maryland, 2016. pp. 45
@inbook{c65d4f810fb0452aab4a3a2e648cc210,
title = "Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship: Past, Current and Future Research",
abstract = "The critical problem for understanding the societal impact of humanities scholarship is that we currently have no satisfactory tools for understanding how wider social impacts occur and, by implication, very few guidelines for stimulating a reflexive dialogue about the influence of the humanities in society. An important assumption in this paper is that impact should be studied both from conceptual, qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Any approach that focuses merely on scientific outputs (such as publications or citations) or that relies on purely bibliometric indicators will result in an incomplete and hence misleading picture of research outcomes and their causality. In this paper, I explore how the emerging research impact agenda is embarking on the humanities and which tools and frameworks are available for tracing and mapping the impact of humanities breakthroughs in society. Examining both quantitative and qualitative tools, the paper argues that we need a better and more comprehensive understanding of the role the humanities as part of a wider web of societal institutions, networks, and agents. Granted that the impact of humanities breakthroughs cannot be located at clearly demarcated or specified units, but takes place along a continuum of dynamic exchanges among multiple agents and institutions, I introduce the term “dynamic artifacts” as the main vehicle for understanding research impact in the humanities. Such artifacts consist of datasets, ideas, analyses, performances or engagement but they rarely take the form of “fixed artifacts” such as patents, intellectual property, contracts or documents trails, which hitherto has been the standard for assessing scientific breakthroughs. Having established this distinction between fixed and dynamic artifacts the paper concludes by showing how the impact of humanities can be traced by utilizing different methods such as impact narratives, altmetrics, network analysis, co-creation and ethnographic fieldwork.",
author = "Pedersen, {David Budtz} and Johansson, {Lasse G{\o}hler}",
year = "2016",
month = "10",
day = "6",
language = "English",
pages = "45",
booktitle = "The Making of the Humanities Confence V",

}

Pedersen, DB & Johansson, LG 2016, Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship: Past, Current and Future Research. in The Making of the Humanities Confence V: 5-7 October 2016, Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore, Maryland, pp. 45, The Making of Humanities V, Baltimore, United States, 05/10/2016.

Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship : Past, Current and Future Research. / Pedersen, David Budtz; Johansson, Lasse Gøhler.

The Making of the Humanities Confence V: 5-7 October 2016, Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore, Maryland, 2016. p. 45.

Research output: Contribution to book/anthology/report/conference proceedingConference abstract in proceedingResearchpeer-review

TY - ABST

T1 - Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship

T2 - Past, Current and Future Research

AU - Pedersen, David Budtz

AU - Johansson, Lasse Gøhler

PY - 2016/10/6

Y1 - 2016/10/6

N2 - The critical problem for understanding the societal impact of humanities scholarship is that we currently have no satisfactory tools for understanding how wider social impacts occur and, by implication, very few guidelines for stimulating a reflexive dialogue about the influence of the humanities in society. An important assumption in this paper is that impact should be studied both from conceptual, qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Any approach that focuses merely on scientific outputs (such as publications or citations) or that relies on purely bibliometric indicators will result in an incomplete and hence misleading picture of research outcomes and their causality. In this paper, I explore how the emerging research impact agenda is embarking on the humanities and which tools and frameworks are available for tracing and mapping the impact of humanities breakthroughs in society. Examining both quantitative and qualitative tools, the paper argues that we need a better and more comprehensive understanding of the role the humanities as part of a wider web of societal institutions, networks, and agents. Granted that the impact of humanities breakthroughs cannot be located at clearly demarcated or specified units, but takes place along a continuum of dynamic exchanges among multiple agents and institutions, I introduce the term “dynamic artifacts” as the main vehicle for understanding research impact in the humanities. Such artifacts consist of datasets, ideas, analyses, performances or engagement but they rarely take the form of “fixed artifacts” such as patents, intellectual property, contracts or documents trails, which hitherto has been the standard for assessing scientific breakthroughs. Having established this distinction between fixed and dynamic artifacts the paper concludes by showing how the impact of humanities can be traced by utilizing different methods such as impact narratives, altmetrics, network analysis, co-creation and ethnographic fieldwork.

AB - The critical problem for understanding the societal impact of humanities scholarship is that we currently have no satisfactory tools for understanding how wider social impacts occur and, by implication, very few guidelines for stimulating a reflexive dialogue about the influence of the humanities in society. An important assumption in this paper is that impact should be studied both from conceptual, qualitative and quantitative perspectives. Any approach that focuses merely on scientific outputs (such as publications or citations) or that relies on purely bibliometric indicators will result in an incomplete and hence misleading picture of research outcomes and their causality. In this paper, I explore how the emerging research impact agenda is embarking on the humanities and which tools and frameworks are available for tracing and mapping the impact of humanities breakthroughs in society. Examining both quantitative and qualitative tools, the paper argues that we need a better and more comprehensive understanding of the role the humanities as part of a wider web of societal institutions, networks, and agents. Granted that the impact of humanities breakthroughs cannot be located at clearly demarcated or specified units, but takes place along a continuum of dynamic exchanges among multiple agents and institutions, I introduce the term “dynamic artifacts” as the main vehicle for understanding research impact in the humanities. Such artifacts consist of datasets, ideas, analyses, performances or engagement but they rarely take the form of “fixed artifacts” such as patents, intellectual property, contracts or documents trails, which hitherto has been the standard for assessing scientific breakthroughs. Having established this distinction between fixed and dynamic artifacts the paper concludes by showing how the impact of humanities can be traced by utilizing different methods such as impact narratives, altmetrics, network analysis, co-creation and ethnographic fieldwork.

UR - http://www.historyofhumanities.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/MOH20program20formatted_rev9.30_FINAL.pdf

M3 - Conference abstract in proceeding

SP - 45

BT - The Making of the Humanities Confence V

CY - Baltimore, Maryland

ER -

Pedersen DB, Johansson LG. Understanding the Societal Impact of Humanities Scholarship: Past, Current and Future Research. In The Making of the Humanities Confence V: 5-7 October 2016, Johns Hopkins University. Baltimore, Maryland. 2016. p. 45