Violins in the Subway: Scarcity Correlations, Evaluative Cultures, and Disciplinary Authority in the Digital Humanities

Despite the proliferation of digital humanities projects, varying greatly in form and media, there remain anxieties about the evaluation of digital work. Digital humanists find, time and time again, that they are expected to perform twice the labour of traditional scholars; once for the work itself and once again for its evaluation. At the same time, traditional humanists often experience a sensation of threat from the digital arena, believing that it is easy to gain employment, grants, and tenure if one is a digital humanist. In this chapter, I ask how we can understand a double logic in which digital-humanities work is at once so powerful as to crowd out the traditional humanists while at the same time so poorly understood as to need supplementation by traditional publication. Classifying the existing mechanisms of evaluation into a three-fold typology of 1.) a desired scarcity correlation; 2.) a set of media-specific denoting frames; and 3.) a set of disciplinary understandings, I show how and why DH remains radical in its work yet traditional in its outputs

De lezer ontletterd

Modern and Contemporary Studie

Achter de muziek aan?

Modern and Contemporary Studie

Van waardeketen naar waardeweb

Modern and Contemporary Studie

Literary authorship in the digital age

Modern and Contemporary Studie

De binnenstebuitelende digitalisatie van het boekenvak

Modern and Contemporary Studie

Explorations in the Libroverse

Modern and Contemporary Studie

Textual reading in digitised classrooms: Reflections on reading beyond the internet

Modern and Contemporary Studie

Randomised comparison of initial triple DMARD therapy with methotrexate monotherapy in combination with low-dose glucocorticoid bridging therapy; 1-year data of the tREACH trial

Objectives To compare 1-year clinical efficacy of (1) initial triple disease-modifying antirheumatic drug therapy (iTDT) with initial methotrexate (MTX) monotherapy (iMM) and (2) different glucocorticoid (GC) bridging therapies: oral versus a single intramuscular injection in early rheumatoid arthritis. Methods In a single-blinded randomised clinical trial patients were randomised into three arms: (A) iTDT (methotrexate+sulfasalazine+hydroxychloroquine) with GCs intramuscularly; (B) iTDT with an oral GC tapering scheme and (C) MTX with oral GCs similar to B. Primary outcomes were (1) area under the curve (AUC) of Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and Disease Activity Score (DAS) and (2) the proportion of patients with radiographic progression. Results 281 patients were randomly assigned to arms A (n=91), B (n=93) or C (n=97). The AUC DAS and HAQ were respectively -2.39 (95% CI -4.77 to -0.00) and -1.67 (95% CI -3.35 to 0.02) lower in patients receiving iTDT than in those receiving iMM. After 3 months, treatment failure occurred less often in the iTDT group, resulting in 40% fewer treatment intensifications. The difference in treatment intensifications between the arms required to maintain the predefined treatment goal remained over time. No differences were seen between the two GC bridging therapies. Respectively 21%, 24% and 23% of patients in arms A, B and C had radiographic progression after 1 year. Patients receiving iTDT had more adjustments of their medication owing to adverse events than those receiving iMM. Conclusions Treatment goals are attained more quickly and maintained with fewer treatment intensifications with iTDT than with iMM. However, no difference in radiographic progression is seen. Both GC bridging therapies are equally effective and, therefore, both can be used

Monographs in a Changing Reading Culture

Modern and Contemporary Studie