Results of the Digital Humanities Survey: CrossAsia Dialogue: Customised DH curriculum for CrossAsia Classroom

/in , , /by

The Specialised Information Service Asia (FID Asia) with its online platform CrossAsia has conducted a comprehensive survey as part of the CrossAsia Dialogue to determine the needs and wishes regarding a tailor-made DH curriculum for the CrossAsia Classroom. With the increasing integration of digital tools and methods, new horizons are opening up for research and teaching in the humanities. In this article, we present and analyse the results of this survey, in which a total of 88 people participated. It should be noted that some questions were asked in a dependent manner, for example when previous knowledge was asked for and this was answered with “No”, which meant that the respondents automatically skipped the relevant areas. This dynamic is reflected in the analysis by the answer option “Question skipped” and is taken into account in the context of the analysis.

Part 1: Regions and technical background

In order to be able to offer customised services to meet the needs of our users, we have collected data on their regional and professional background.

Figure 1: (Question 1) Which category best describes you?

 

The survey results show a diverse participation of different groups with an interest in the FID’s DH programmes. While PhD students (15) are the most common single group within the overall majority of post-graduate researchers (53). In contrast, there is a minority of MA and BA students (12) as well as a small group of library users (6) and others who do not belong to an academic institution (6). This composition reflects the general user base of the FID and makes it clear that the services are primarily used by established academics, doctoral students and advanced students. This emphasises the focus on cutting-edge research and confirms that the FID’s services are primarily developed to meet the needs of these groups. In terms of the relationship to university services, this shows a need for services for established researchers regardless of their academic training during their studies.

The regional origin of the interviewees also shows that the interest in DH offerings broadly corresponds to the composition of CrossAsia users as a whole.

 

Figure 2: (Question 2) In which regions do you work/study?

 

The majority of respondents (36) stated that they were interested in China, followed by Japan (27) and Korea (15). Southeast Asia and Central Asia were mentioned by 5 and 2 respondents respectively. The “Other” category had 10 responses, with regions such as South Asia, West Asia, Greater China, the USA and Europe being mentioned. This distribution also reflects the usage patterns of our services, with China being the most requested region for FID Asia’s offerings, followed by Japan and Korea. This emphasises the relevance and importance of these regions for the research activities and interests of our users.

The following questions are aimed at the specific DH background of the participants, based on the question about the initial contact.

 

Figure 3: (Question 3) How did you first hear about the digital humanities?

 

The responses, for which multiple answers were permitted, show that structured educational programmes and self-study are on a par. University seminars or workshops are the most common answer (41) for initial contact with the topic. This was followed by 27 responses for online research. Under the category “Other” (8), lectures, programmes offered by their own university and personal interest were named as sources. These results suggest that structured offerings such as those provided by CrossAsia are useful for promoting interest in the digital humanities and that they should be made available online on an ongoing basis

This is followed by a question on the participants’ self-assessment of their current level of knowledge of the digital humanities.

 

Figure 4: (Question 4) How familiar are you with the field of digital humanities?

 

The majority of survey participants already have some understanding of the topic of DH. Even if this does not allow any conclusions to be drawn about the entirety of FID users, it shows that offers that require prior knowledge best reflect the level of knowledge of those interested. Just over half (52%) are somewhat familiar or familiar. Around 11% of participants stated that they were “not at all familiar” with DH topics. Given that the user base consists mainly of prospective and established scientists, specifically targeted training programmes for a smaller group of users may be beneficial.

We then asked them to assess the relevance of the topic for their own research.

 

Figure 5: (Question 5) How important is knowledge of digital humanities for your work or studies?

 

The survey results illustrate the relevance of digital humanities for one’s own work or studies. Especially in a direct comparison of the answers given (red and blue in Figure 5). Over 80% of respondents stated that the digital humanities were “very important” or “fairly important” to them. This distribution emphasises the importance of digital humanities and the need to provide corresponding offerings.

 

Evaluation part 1:

The results show that the FID Asia should further develop its programmes in the CrossAsia Classroom in order to meet the needs of cutting-edge research. The survey shows that the majority of respondents are in advanced studies or already have a doctorate. This emphasises the need to view our services as complementary to university courses. Our programmes are not purely introductory courses. Rather, they are designed to teach advanced methods and techniques. The aim is to make a sustainable contribution to the research community.

 

Part 2: Technical knowledge of respondents

In order to make customised offers, it is necessary to identify the technical background of the target audience more precisely. The second part of the survey therefore aimed to record the technical skills and tools of the digital humanities. A selection of common programmes and services were surveyed. However, respondents also had the opportunity to freely name applications.

 

Figure 6: (Question 6) Please indicate which of the following tools or services you have used as part of your research work.

 

The answers illustrate the focus on the China region already visible in question 2. Of the top five tools and services used, three have a regional focus on China (CBDB, CGIS, MARKUS). The most frequently mentioned service is GitHub/GitLab, which is used by 28 respondents. This confirms the FID’s efforts to use GitHub for collaborations as well as for its own developments, which is currently being implemented. Among the four free responses, MeCab and ChatGPT were each mentioned twice. The survey was also approached with the expectation that universal tools that can be used regardless of region and language would be more strongly represented overall. This was not confirmed in this survey.

 

Figure 7: (Question 7) Which of the following technologies do you use in your research?

 

Question 7 aimed to find out the technologies used by the survey participants in their own research. Python is the most frequently used technology with 21 responses, followed by a relatively high prevalence of xml-based technologies. It is also interesting to note the low number of responses on JavaScript (10), which is a central component of the World Wide Web. In the free responses (4), relational databases (SQL) were mentioned once.

 

Evaluation part 2:

A certain need for action can be deduced from the answers given. Given the small number of participants, services that provide structured data appear to be much better known than the analytical tools for processing this data. Imparting knowledge about the relevant tools can therefore be seen as a requirement for the CrossAsia training programmes. Furthermore, the ongoing efforts to strengthen the FID’s GitHub presence should be continued and included in the DH educational programmes.

 

Part 3: Training programmes offered through the CrossAsia Classroom

The third section of the survey determines how respondents feel about training programmes, in what form they should be offered and which topics are particularly relevant.

 

Figure 8: (Question 8) Would you be interested in taking part in workshops or training courses on digital humanities?

 

As expected, the level of interest among participants is high, with the survey results showing a clear interest in workshops or training courses on digital humanities. 43.18% of respondents fully agreed, while 21.59% somewhat agreed. Only 2.27% stated that they were not very interested. This illustrates the need for training in this area. In order to tailor the training programme to the needs of the users, the users’ preferences for the different forms of training should be surveyed.

 

Figure 9: (Question 9) Which format would you prefer for teaching knowledge about digital humanities?

 

The survey results show a clear preference for online formats. Under “other”, three respondents mentioned “asynchronous video inputs” and “hackathons” as other possible options. The comparatively low interest in academic courses reflects the backgrounds of the survey participants described in Part 1. In order to take the preferences and needs of users into account when planning and designing training and further education programmes, the final survey focuses on the selection of topics.

 

Figure 10: (Question 10) Which digital skills or tools would you most like to learn?

 

It is clear that the topics of “data visualisation” (45) and “text mining” (41) are in particularly high demand, with “network analysis” (31) in third place. In addition, offers on the topics of “digital archiving” and “digital editions” were requested with 30 mentions each. In the open question about projects, “digital editions” was mentioned most frequently (7 out of 26).

 

Figure 11: (Question 11) What specific projects or research work do you have in mind in which digital humanities methods are applied?

 

The interest in other topics such as “OCR (Optical Character Recognition)” (29) as well as “Machine Learning” and “GIS (Geographic Information Systems)” (24 each) shows the diversity of respondents’ needs in the field of digital humanities and helps the FID to plan the training programme within the CrossAsia Classroom and the specialist training courses accordingly.

 

Evaluation part 3:

It can be stated that there is a clear interest in workshops or training courses in the field of digital humanities. The majority of respondents were in favour of such offerings, with online formats being particularly preferred. This reflects the need for flexible and accessible training programmes. The different degrees of specialisation of the individual academics lead to a wide range of desired uses. While a certain basic knowledge of the digital humanities is already available, some participants are still at the beginning of their work with it and would like targeted training programmes. The clear identification of desired topics helps us to expand the training programme accordingly and adapt it to the stated needs.

What’s next?

The survey has shown that the topic of digital humanities is also becoming increasingly important in the Asian sciences. Based on your many helpful responses and suggestions that we received as part of the survey, we can now tackle this task in a more targeted manner. As a first step, the DH Lunchtalks were launched in November 2023, which serve as a low-threshold introduction to the topic of digital humanities and as a platform for the exchange of ideas and best practices.
In addition, the Digital Humanities Conference “Charting the European D-SEA: Digital Scholarship in East Asian Studies” will take place in summer 2024 in cooperation with the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin and the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science. The aim is to provide an overview of the current state of digital research in East Asian Studies in Europe, to build a European community of East Asian scholars and to offer a platform for the exchange of important methods and resources in innovative digital projects worldwide. In addition, it aims to foster an interdisciplinary dialogue that brings together scholars and technical experts from different disciplines to share their knowledge on the application of digital methods and exchange experiences.

We invite you to accompany us in the further process with your suggestions and feedback.

Umfrage zu Digital Humanities | Survey on Digital Humanities

/in , , , /by

(English below)

 

Liebe CrossAsia Community,

wie bereits im Newsletter angekündigt, führen wir eine kurze Umfrage zu Digital Humanities in Bezug auf CrossAsia durch. Sie soll uns helfen, unsere Zielgruppe, Ihre Kompetenzen und Erwartungen besser kennen zu lernen.

Ein Klick auf den Link bringt Sie zur Umfrage-Seite. Die Umfrage dauert ca. 10 Minuten.

CrossAsia Umfrage zu Digital Humanities in deutsch.

 

Wir wünschen viel Spaß und freuen uns die Antworten.

 

Ihr / Euer

CrossAsia Team

Dear CrossAsia Community,

As already announced in the newsletter, we are conducting a short survey on Digital Humanities in relation to CrossAsia. It is intended to help us get to know our target group, your competencies and expectations better.

Clicking on the link will take you to the survey page. The survey will take about 10 minutes to complete.

CrossAsia survey on Digital Humanities in English.

 

We hope you have fun and look forward to receiving your answers.

 

Your

CrossAsia Team

UPDATE: CROSSASIA USER MEETING MOVED TO JANUARY 19, 2023

/in , , , , /by

(see English version below)

Aus strategischen Gründen muss das CrossAsia User-Meeting, das Informations- und Austauschtreffen mit CrossAsia und dem FID (Fachinformationsdienst) Asien, auf den 19. Januar 2023 verlegt werden.

Neues Datum: Donnerstag, 19. Januar 2023
Neue Uhrzeit: 18:00-19:30 Uhr (UTC+1)
Ort: Online via WebEx: https://spk-berlin.webex.com/spk-berlin/j.php?MTID=m1416563314df376d0e86bcaa39fba6f2

Das Austauschtreffen richtet sich an alle, die die Angebote des Portals CrossAsia und des FID Asien nutzen und sich mit den Regionen Ostasien, Südostasien und Zentralasien beschäftigen.

Um Sie in Ihrer Forschung auch künftig bestmöglich zu unterstützen, möchten wir uns wieder g

erne mit Ihnen austauschen. Wir sind an Ihren Erfahrungen, Ideen und Wünschen interessiert, um Defizite, Ausbaupotentiale oder auch neue Aktionsfelder für CrossAsia zu identifizieren.

Geplanter Ablauf
Nach einem kurzen Impulsvortrag zum derzeitigen Stand und den geplanten Entwicklungen beim FID Asien, werden wir in Breakout-Sessions über die Themen diskutieren, die Ihnen im Kontext unserer Services wichtig sind. Themen sind u.a.: Digitalisierung, DH-Methoden im Kontext von CrossAsia oder Services und Tools, die CrossAsia anbieten sollte.

Wir würden uns sehr freuen, wenn Sie uns aktiv bei der weiteren Themenfindung unterstützen würden und uns Ihre Wünsche und Anregungen mitteilen. Senden Sie uns Ihre Vorschläge einfach per Mail an xAsia@sbb.spk-berlin.de.

Wir freuen uns auf anregende Gespräche, viele Ideen und natürlich auch auf den direkten Austausch mit Ihnen!

 

Ihr CrossAsia Team

 

Due to strategic reasons, the CrossAsia User Meeting, the information and exchange meeting of CrossAsia / FID (Fachinformationsdienst) Asia, had to be postponed to January 19, 2023.

New Date: Thursday, January 19, 2023
New Time: 6:00-7:30pm (UTC+1)
Place: Online via WebEx: https://spk-berlin.webex.com/spk-berlin/j.php?MTID=m1416563314df376d0e86bcaa39fba6f2

The exchange meeting is intended for all those who use the services of the CrossAsia portal and the FID Asia and are involved in research in the regions of East Asia, Southeast Asia and Central Asia.

In order to support you in your research in the best possible way, we would like to enter again into a dialogue with you. We are interested in your experiences, ideas and wishes in order to identify deficits, potential for expansion or even new fields of action for CrossAsia.

Planned schedule
After a short keynote presentation on the current state and planned developments at CrossAsia and the FID Asia, we will discuss in breakout sessions the topics that are important to you in the context of our services. Topics include digitalisation, DH methods in the context of CrossAsia, or services and tools that CrossAsia should offer.

We would be very pleased if you would actively support us in identifying further topics so that we can respond to your wishes and suggestions. Simply send us your ideas by e-mail to xAsia@sbb.spk-berlin.de.

We look forward to stimulating discussions, many ideas and, of course, the direct exchange with you!

 

Your CrossAsia Team

SBB-PK

Ergebnisse zur Evaluation des CrossAsia Classrooms

/in , , , /by

Im Wintersemester 2021/2022 haben wir Sie, die Teilnehmer:innen der freien Webinare, die im CrossAsia Classroom angeboten wurden, gebeten diese zu evaluieren. Durch diese Evaluierung wollten wir feststellen, wie zufrieden Sie mit unserem Schulungsangebot sind, welche Inhalte für Sie besonders nützlich sind und was wir für Sie verbessern können.

Bevor wir Ihnen unsere Ergebnisse vorstellen, möchten wir uns bei Ihnen für Ihr Feedback ganz herzlich bedanken. Jeder ausgefüllte Fragebogen und jeder Kommentar hat uns geholfen zu verstehen, wie die Webinare Sie bei Ihrer wissenschaftlichen Tätigkeit unterstützen!

Im letzten Wintersemester haben wir insgesamt 20 Schulungen angeboten, davon zwei allgemeine Einführungen, sieben Schulungen mit japanologischen Inhalten, vier mit sinologischen Schwerpunkt und jeweils zwei mit zentralasiatischen, südostasiatischen und koreanischen Inhalten. Auf diese Veranstaltungen verteilten sich insgesamt 162 Teilnehmer:innen, von denen insgesamt 78 den Fragebogen vollständig ausgefüllt haben. Im folgenden Beitrag handelt es sich um die Auswertung Ihrer Antworten.

Struktur der Teilnehmer:innen

Zuerst möchten wir darauf eingehen, was Sie uns über sich verraten haben.

Die Mehrzahl der Antwortenden waren Studierende (67%), gefolgt von Doktorand:innen (13%), Bibliotheksbeschäftigten (9%)  und Promovierten Wissenschaftler:innen (6%). Es nahmen keine Professor:innen teil.

Graphik 1: Tätigkeit der Befragten

Es ist wenig überraschend, dass China und Japan die beiden Regionen sind, die die meisten Interessierten angezogen hat. Das zeigt sich gleich in zweierlei Hinsicht. Zum einen bei der Frage nach den Regionen, in denen die fachlichen Interessen der Teilnehmenden verortet sind und auch in der Regionenzuordnung der angebotenen Webinare.

Graphik 2: Verteilung auf die Regionen

Graphik 3 Aufteilung auf Schulungen

 

Für uns sehr spannend waren außerdem Ihre Antworten darauf, wie Sie auf unsere Webinare aufmerksam geworden sind. Dadurch können wir erkennen, ob wir Sie auf den bisher genutzten Kommunikationswegen erreichen.

Graphik 4 Informationen zur Schulung

 

Einige von Ihnen haben hier Gebrauch von der Kommentarfunktion gemacht und uns mitgeteilt, dass Sie über die J-Studien auf die jeweiligen Veranstaltungen aufmerksam geworden sind. Es freut uns sehr, dass unsere Informationen Sie auf diesem Wege erreichen.

Evaluierung der Schulungsinhalte

Um zu verstehen, wie Sie die Schulungsinhalte wahrnehmen, wurden drei Fragen gestellt. In der ersten wollten wir wissen, inwiefern die Schulungsinhalte den Ankündigungen im CrossAsia Classroom entsprachen. 97% der Evaluationsteilnehmer:innen sind der Meinung, dass die sie mit den letztendlich vermittelten Inhalten übereinstimmen.

Graphik 5 Inhalte entsprachen Ankündigungen

 

Darüber hinaus wollten wir wissen, ob die vermittelten Inhalte für sie verständlich dargestellt wurden. Auch hier äußerten sich die Evaluationsteilnehmer:innen sehr positiv.

Graphik 6 Verständlichkeit der Schulungen

 

Die dritte, und vielleicht wichtigste Frage, war die nach der Nützlichkeit der Schulungsinhalte. Hier stimmten über 83% zu, dass die angesprochenen Themen für sie und ihre wissenschaftliche Arbeit nützlich sind.

Graphik 7 Nützlichkeit der Inhalte

 

Fehlerbetrachtung und Fazit

Die Evaluation hat eine klassische „Survivorship Bias“ der besagt, dass nur die Meinungen von Personen, die an der Umfrage teilgenommen haben, berücksichtigt wurden. Eine weitere Ungenauigkeit kommt durch die  ungleichmäßigen Verteilung der Evaluationsteilnehmer:innen auf die einzelnen Schulungen. Um eine Anonymisierung der Teilnehmenden zu gewährleisten, wurde bei weniger als fünf Webinarbesucher:innen in der Regel vom Teilen der Umfrage abgesehen.

Nichtsdestotrotz sind die Ergebnisse aussagekräftig. Sie zeigen eine große Zufriedenheit mit unseren angebotenen Inhalten und darüber hinaus erreichen wir Sie auf den bisher genutzten Wegen. Wir werden deshalb weiterhin freie Webinare für CrossAsia und die einzelnen Regionen anbieten und das Angebot noch weiter anpassen.

Wir freuen uns schon sehr auf ein Wiedersehen in unseren Webinaren im kommenden Sommersemester 2022. Mehr dazu rechtzeitig vor Semesterbeginn!

Umfrage von Adam Matthew Digital

/in , , /by

In CrossAsia haben unsere registrierten Nutzerinnen und Nutzer Zugang zu mittlerweile 13 Datenbanken von Adam Matthew Digital, wie z.B. Foreign Office files for China, 1919 – 1980, Foreign Office files for Japan, 1919-1952, Foreign Office Files for South East Asia 1963-1980, Socialism on film und anderen mehr. Sie finden die Datenbanken, indem Sie auf der Datenbankenseite von CrossAsia in den Suchschlitz “Adam Matthew” eingeben. Der Anbieter möchte die Suchfunktion in seinen Datenbanken verbessern und bittet Sie dabei um Unterstützung. Sie sind eingeladen, sich an einer kurzen Umfrage, die nicht mehr als 5 Minuten Ihrer Zeit in Anspruch nehmen wird, zu beteiligen. Ihr Feedback soll in direkt in die Optimierung der Suche einfließen. Die Umfrage ist bis zum 20.12.2021 aktiv.

 

zur Umfrage

 

 

Survey on Research Conditions in China-related Sciences in Europe: Results

/in , , /by

The 23rd Conference of the European Association for Chinese Studies (EACS) took place August 24 – 27, 2021. It was hosted as an online conference by the East Asian Institute at Leipzig University.

During the preparation of and while accompanying the conference, CrossAsia had called for your participation in investigating the research conditions in China-related sciences in Europe.

We would like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank you for your participation in the survey, the aim of which was to better understand the needs and wishes within the research community and to learn more about the conditions and requirements in the China-related sciences in Europe.

Together with European partner libraries, we would like to contribute to sustainably improving the conditions for Asia-related research in Europe by building a European knowledge- and licensing-network. Therefore, we wanted to find answers to questions regarding the prioritisation of different types of resources, ­the understanding of the process of licensing e-media, the spread and utilisation of methods in Digital Humanities (DH), as well as the international networking of scholars and the resulting synergies when accessing resources.

These answers will be given below.

Characterisation of the Participants

A total of 630 persons participated in the 23rd EACS. We received 132 complete and correctly filled-in questionnaires. Of these, only questionnaires from people who are presently associated with a European research institution were evaluated.

Scholars from 24 European countries took part in the survey, the majority of which are working in Germany (29%), followed by United Kingdom and Italy (12, % each). The remaining countries score under 5% each.

In Germany, the Fachinformationsdienst Asien (FID Asien, i.e., Special Subject Information Service Asia) and the online-platform CrossAsia provide a well-groomed range of materials to supply researchers with resources on Asia-sciences, especially, the China-related ones.

It is against this background, and in view of the comparatively high number of people working in Germany who participated in the survey, that a certain imbalance in the answers will very likely be introduced into the considerations following below.

Ill. 1. Survey participants according to country.

 

The clear majority of participants (98%) is active at an academic institution. The majority (90%) of these, again, at a university or college. Generally, these places do grant access to a library in order to provide the required resources.

Ill. 2. Institutional affiliation of the persons interviewed.

Unsurprisingly, more than 97% of the interviewed identified Mainland China as the core of their research interests; beyond that, over 21% named Taiwan. As a rule, littoral states of China are not taken into consideration in research. Individual researchers, however, are working on topics that also relate to Japan, South Korea, Mongolia, Russia, South East Asia and, to a lesser degree, South Asia.

Ill. 3. Visual display of the main research regions (up to three entries per person allowed).

Regarding the thematic orientation of the research contents, it is obvious that classical, text-oriented, themes were the strongest group (36%) of answers of the interviewed persons from all European states participating. The feedback from Russia was an exception. Here, all participants indicated that history was not among their main interests.

Another strong research area is literature/philology (25%). Smaller areas of research are history of art, linguistics, philosophy, political science, religious science and, sociology (ca. 10% each).

Only a few researchers (>5%) study anthropology, archaeology/pre- and early history, economics, education/educational sciences, human geography, law, library and information sciences, and media/information/communication sciences. The evaluation results show that the “traditional” fields of China-related sciences are still a the majority. But smaller, or newer, scholarly fields are also present. The heterogeneity of European China-related research mirrors the answers of the participants in the survey.

Access to Resources

The survey intended to provide an overview of the access options to information resources in European China-related research.

Central in this context is the question of the meaning, the relevance, of different types of sources. The survey differentiates between print- and online-resources. Here, all resources are labelled e-resources only when they exist as sources and special subject information available online, in all different kinds, e.g., e-books, digital journals, licensed databases, or Open Access materials.

Ill. 4. Importance of print resources for participants.

Ill. 5. Importance of e-resources for participants.

The majority of participants in this survey (89%) rated e-resources as more important than printed materials. This shows that access to electronic resources has become essential for successful research. Looking at the German participants only, this impression gets marginally stronger (ca. 95% of the German participants consider e-resources essential). Nevertheless, printed media also maintain a strong position: 87% of the participants consider them essential or, still essential, respectively.

Ill. 6. Usage of different types of material (up to three entries per person allowed).

These types of material reflect the interviewees’ research interests which are predominantly historical or, philological/linguistical.

Access to E-Resources

Besides the confirmed need for e-resources, their availability and accessibility are of central concern for China-related research in Europe.

Ill. 7. Access to databases via respective institution.

The diagram shows clearly that the majority of the participants still lack access to the databases needed for their research. Scholars working at German institutions responded markedly more positive to this question. More than 74% confirmed to have access to needed materials. In the optional commentary section, respondents often referred to CrossAsia.

In order to offer access to e-resources, they usually have to be licensed first. The questionnaire shows that the whole process of licensing for science is still rather intransparent. To begin with, only about 17% of the interviewees do not know for sure who may suggest resources for licensing at their institutes. Furthermore, over 31% do not know who at their institutions is involved in the process of evaluating new resources. More than 33% are unable to name the person(s) which ultimately decide on the licensing of e-resources.

Given the urgent necessity to better integrate e-resources into the general supply of information, students and researchers should be more involved in the decision-making process.

Digital Humanities

In the field of DH, methods become usually applicable only when the required e-resources are available and data can be generated. Therefore, the availability of the respective online resources constitute a precondition for the straightforward implementation of DH-projects which need this kind of sources.

Ill. 8. Usage of DH-methods in research of respondents.

The increased importance of Digital Humanities in China-related research is also evident in the above illustration. It shows that nearly 50% of the respondents are employing DH-methods or are planning to do so. This positive general picture is evenly distributed over Europe.

Regarding the distribution of different tools, we get the following picture:

Ill. 9. Distribution of DH-tools used.

It comes to no surprise that two text-based methods (text and data mining [30%] and textual analysis [25%]) are mentioned most often, since the majority of the participants indicated a philological/historical research background. This is in contrast to the limited availability of the required data. 23% of the respondents stated that they do not have access to the respective materials.

Ill. 10. Access to licensed databases needed to conduct DH-projects.

Networking among researchers was another point of the survey. Its aim was to determine to what extend scholars who do not have access to important resources in their respective countries manage to get this access via an affiliation with international research projects.

Ill. 11. Percentage, participation of interviewees in international research groups.

In the present European context of China-related sciences, international research groups are still the exception. Only about 20% of the surveyed scholars presently take part in any of them. However, the fact that 45% of the respondents state that they plan to engage in an international research group shows their keen interest. Unfortunately, the cooperation in an international research project does not necessarily result in access to resources. Only 9% of the answers acknowledge access to the resources of the partner institutions, 21% do not have access.

Conclusion

China-related research in Europe is reflected in the survey as humanistically (geisteswissenschaftlich) dominated, with a focus on Mainland China. Access to resources, regardless whether in print or online, is considered as very important. At the same time, access, especially to online materials, is not granted everywhere. One reason for this might be a lack of knowledge surrounding the procedures of licensing.

If these were communicated better, researchers would be enabled to exert their influence in the right places by submitting their suggestions and wishes. One positive exception in Europe is the literature supply in Germany where significantly less researchers have grave problems with obtaining vital information.

It can be safely assumed that the main reason for this is the Special Subject Information Service Asia (FID) with its online offerings in CrossAsia which closely cooperates with the researchers in order to provide the required materials. The numerous mentioning in the survey’s commentaries may be taken as evidence and confirmation.

The results of the survey confirm the expectation that access to e-resources in Europe is still far from being homogeneous. There are big differences between individual countries regarding the provisioning of required materials, while the procedures of licensing individual databases are not transparent.

Today, individual scholars’ high degree of specialisation leads to a wide range of usage requirement and requests. In particular, with regard to the continuously increasing digitisation and the growing number of DH-projects, a united and coordinated approach should be able to more adequately live up to this kind of diversity. In order to facilitate access to electronic media, some things are indespensible: consultation with, and advice from, scholars and librarians in specialized libraries and information centres, the sharing of information surrounding the topic of licensing, and the exchange of experience reports.

Long-term international cooperation and reliable coordination of diverse partners could be and, in our opinion, are, instrumental in improving access conditions for the European research community in general.

The FID Asia considers this its duty. Together with you, we would like to take on this challenge.

Umfrage zu den Forschungsbedingungen in den chinabezogenen Wissenschaften in Europa

/in , , , , /by

Liebe Nutzerinnen und Nutzer von CrossAsia,

vom 24.08. bis zum 27.08. wird die 23. Konferenz der European Association for Chinese Studies (EACS) stattfinden. Sie wird durch das Ostasiatische Institut der Universität Leipzig als Online-Konferenz organisiert.

CrossAsia wird mit einem virtuellen Stand auf der Konferenz vertreten sein, an dem wir die Konferenzteilnehmer einladen, mit uns ins Gespräch zu kommen. Matthias Kaun, Leiter der Ostasienabteilung der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, wird am Donnerstag, den 26.08., um 18:00 Uhr den Vortrag: “CrossAsia – a German National Infrastructure for Asian Studies – Current Situation and European Perspective” halten. Er thematisiert eine Bibliotheks- und Informationsinfrastruktur, die ihre Aufgaben neu überdenkt, um asienbezogene Wissenschaft und Forschung in einer immer stärker globalisierten und digital vernetzten Welt zu unterstützen. Er wird auch aufzeigen, wie CrossAsia versucht, den Zugang zu Sammlungen – unabhängig von ihrer physischen Form und/oder Nutzungseinschränkungen aufgrund von Lizenzbeschränkungen – so zu organisieren, dass die Materialien auffindbar, zugänglich, interoperabel und wiederverwendbar sind, wo immer dies möglich ist. Zugleich sollen einige Ideen vorgestellt werden, wie die Zugangssituation für die europäische Forschungsgemeinschaft auf Grundlage internationaler Zusammenarbeit und zuverlässiger Koordination zwischen Partnern und Netzwerken verbessert werden könnte. Angesichts der vielfältigen Anwendungsfälle und Nutzungsszenarien, insbesondere im Kontext elektronischer und digital verfügbarer Texte und Quellen sowie im Kontext der Digital Humanities, erscheint ein gemeinsames und koordiniertes Vorgehen vielversprechend.

Mit dem Ziel, die Bedürfnisse und Wünsche der Forschergemeinschaft besser zu verstehen und mehr über die Bedingungen und Anforderungen in den chinabezogenen Wissenschaften in Europa zu erfahren, haben wir eine Umfrage erarbeitet. Gemeinsam mit europäischen Partnerbibliotheken möchten wir dazu beitragen, die Bedingungen für die Asienforschung in Europa durch den Aufbau eines europäischen Wissens- und Lizenzierungsnetzwerks nachhaltig zu verbessern. Wie die EACS-Mitglieder sind auch Sie, die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer von CrossAsia, herzlich dazu eingeladen, an dieser kurzen Umfrage (für die Beantwortung der Fragen braucht es  ca. 5-10 Minuten) teilzunehmen und uns zu helfen, relevante Informationen für dieses Vorhaben zu sammeln. Für alle Hinweise Ihrerseits zu diesem Thema sind wir Ihnen sehr dankbar.

Die Umfrage wird von heute an bis zum 03.09.2021 zugänglich sein. Über die Ergebnisse  werden wir an dieser Stelle nach der EACS Konferenz berichten.

 

zur Online-Umfrage

 

 

 

 

Ergebnisse der Umfrage zu Forschungsdaten in den asienbezogenen Wissenschaften

/in , , , , /by

Im Frühjahr haben wir Sie als FID Asien gemeinsam mit den Fachgesellschaften (DGA, DMG, DVCS, GJF, VfK, VSJF) zu Forschungsdaten in den asienbezogenen Wissenschaften befragt. Ziel der Umfrage war, zu ermitteln, wie Sie im Forschungsprozess mit ihren asienbezogenen Daten umgehen, welche Erfahrungen und Meinungen Sie zur Recherche und Nachnutzung sowie Erstellung und Bereitstellung von Forschungsdaten haben und welche Unterstützungsangebote Sie bereits erhalten, bzw. welche Sie sich seitens des FID Asien wünschen.

Wir möchten Ihnen an dieser Stelle ganz herzlich für Ihre rege Beteiligung und die vielfältigen, äußerst hilfreichen Hinweise danken, die Sie uns gegeben haben. Die Beteiligung an der Umfrage und die Ergebnisse zeigen sehr deutlich, dass Forschungsdaten und der Umgang mit diesen auch in den asienbezogenen Wissenschaften bereits wichtige Themen sind, aber es auch noch einigen Erklärungs- und Diskussionsbedarf gibt. Mit diesem Beitrag möchten wir über eine Auswertung der Ergebnisse hinaus versuchen, die Diskussion weiter anzuregen und zugleich in einigen Bereichen vielleicht etwas mehr Klarheit schaffen.

Im Folgenden finden Sie eine Auswertung der Umfrage mit den wichtigsten Ergebnissen und Grafiken sowie mit Erläuterungen; eine vollständige Aufführung aller Tabellen und Grafiken finden Sie zum Download anbei.

 

 

Alle Tabellen und Grafiken

Read more

Research data survey – Newsletter 18

/in , , /by

Survey on research data in Asia related studies

Dear Asian studies researcher,
Dear CrossAsia user,

The current newsletter is all about research data. Research data is becoming increasingly important due to the digital change in scientific research and the use of computer-based methods. This applies not only to the humanities, cultural and social sciences in general, but also to Asian studies, where comparatively little has been done so far in contrast to other disciplines. In the debate on digital research data there are three important aspects to be mentioned:

  • The principle for good scientific practice and making the research basis comprehensible.
  • Research data as citable data publications that can not only serve as a basis for the research question and the context in which they were created, but are also available for a wide variety of alternative usages.
  • The presentation of the research data that can be used with digital tools and can, for example, generate further, probably unforeseen findings by “improving the use” of the data, e.g. via visualisations and statistical methods.

In addition, the discussion about digital research data also concerns several legal, ethical and organisational aspects, such as allowing other researchers to re-use the data, obtaining e.g. study participants’ consent to the subsequent use of the data, and the protection of personal rights and other sensitive data.

The topic of research data, including how to deal with it, is on the agenda of scientific committees and research foundations. For example, the German Research Foundation (DFG) calls on researchers, when submitting their project proposal, to include a concept for how to deal with research data in the respective project.

The Specialised Information Service Asia (FID Asia) project, which receives substantial financial support from the DFG, has the aim to support the specialised community researching on Asia in managing research data and to initiate a debate on the subject within the research community. We also take into account the National Research Data Infrastructure (NFDI), which is currently being established. We would like to ask the Asian studies community to draw attention to the needs and special features of research data so that we can help communicate these, so that these will be taken into account in the development of the infrastructural and technical framework of the NFDI.

In order to initiate this dialogue, FID Asia, together with the research associations (DGA, DMG, DVCS, GJF, VfK, VSJF), would like to learn from your expertise. We would like to know what you do with your data in the research process, what experiences and opinions you have regarding re-use as well as the creation and provision of research data.

We would be very glad if you would take a moment to complete this survey. To answer the survey will take about 20 minutes. We will publish the results of the survey in the CrossAsia Blog if there is sufficient participation.

The survey is open until: 8 April 2019

ONLINE SURVEY

Further interesting and new developments from CrossAsia (only in German)

Recently licensed databases and trials (only in German)

Thank you very much for your support.

Your FID Asia team

Umfrage zur Literaturversorgung im Bereich Asien

/in , , /by

Der FID Asien – CrossAsia wird von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in dem Förderprogramm „Fachinformationsdienste für die Wissenschaft“ gefördert. Die DFG evaluiert derzeit dieses Förderprogramm und bittet alle Nutzerinnen und Nutzer der CrossAsia-Angebote im Rahmen einer Umfrage um ihre Unterstützung.

Ein Hinweis in eigener Sache: Wir von CrossAsia werden die Ergebnisse bzw. die Auswertung dieser Umfrage nicht erhalten! Sollte diese Umfrage für Sie Anlass sein, uns etwas zu unseren Angeboten und Services mitzuteilen, so kontaktieren Sie uns doch bitte über Email oder nutzen bitte das CrossAsia-Forum.

  • Literaturversorgung im Bereich Asien

    Wie gestaltet sich die Versorgung mit wissenschaftlicher Literatur in Ihrem Tätigkeitsbereich? Welche Medientypen spielen in Ihrer Arbeit eine wichtige Rolle? Haben Sie Zugang zu den für Sie relevanten Forschungsinformationen, die Sie für Ihre wissenschaftliche Arbeit benötigen? Was würden Sie noch brauchen?

    Im Auftrag der DFG evaluiert die Prognos AG das Förderprogramm „Fachinformationsdienste für die Wissenschaft“ (FID). Als Teil der Evaluation führt die Prognos AG eine Umfrage von (potentiellen) Nutzer/-innen der Fachinformationsdienste durch.

    Sie beschäftigen sich mit Forschung oder nutzen für andere Zwecke wissenschaftliche Literatur und forschungsrelevante Informationen? Dann laden wir Sie ein, an der Befragung teilzunehmen. Mit Ihrer Teilnahme an der Umfrage helfen Sie uns, Fragen zu der Literaturversorgung in Ihrem Bereich und weitere Fragen zu beantworten. Die Umfrage auszufüllen, dauert etwa 10 Minuten.

    Hier geht es zur Umfrage: www.prognos.com/FID/Nutzer/CrossAsia/Portal