User Required? On the Value of User Research in the Digital Humanities

Although computational tools play an increasingly important role in the humanities, adoption of tools by scholars does not always reach its potential. One approach to this problem is user research to uncover the needs of the users. However, it is uncertain whether such user requirements can be generalized to a wider group of humanities scholars, and whether users are able to explicate their requirements for methodological innovation. We ask what the role of user research is in the Digital Humanities by discussing gathered user requirements for two projects. We categorized the requirements as withinor out-of-scope of the projects’ goals, and found a tension between the specificity of humanities’ research methods, and generalizability for a broader applicable tool. With the out-of-scope requirements we are able to map the wider research workflow, showing DH tools will most likely take a spot in the wider workflow, and that it is infeasible to create a tool for the entire workflow that is generic enough for a larger user group. However, the within-scope requirements led to features that were sufficiently generic for the tool to be adopted, also for unintended purposes. These insights show user research has a clear benefit for DH projects.

[1]  Martijn Kleppe,et al.  Just Google It , 2014 .

[2]  Melissa Terras,et al.  Digital Humanities in Practice , 2012 .

[3]  Jan Gulliksen,et al.  Key principles for user-centred systems design , 2003, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[4]  B. A. Tague,et al.  UNIX time-sharing system: Foreword , 1978, The Bell System Technical Journal.

[5]  Mark Hedges,et al.  Scholarly primitives: Building institutional infrastructure for humanities e-Science , 2013, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[6]  Christine L. Borgman,et al.  The conundrum of sharing research data , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[7]  Joris van Zundert,et al.  If You Build It, Will We Come? Large Scale Digital Infrastructures as a Dead End for Digital Humanities. , 2012 .

[8]  Nicola Orio,et al.  User Needs for Enhanced Engagement with Cultural Heritage Collections , 2012, TPDL.

[9]  Melissa Terras,et al.  If You Build It Will They Come? The LAIRAH Study: Quantifying the Use of Online Resources in the Arts and Humanities through Statistical Analysis of User Log Data , 2006, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[10]  Franciska de Jong,et al.  Talking with Scholars: Developing a Research Environment for Oral History Collections , 2013, TPDL Workshops.

[11]  Fred Gibbs,et al.  Building Better Digital Humanities Tools: Toward broader audiences and user-centered designs , 2012, Digit. Humanit. Q..

[12]  Charlie Edwards The Digital Humanities and its Users , 2012 .

[13]  Chris Welty,et al.  Detection , Representation , and Exploitation of Events in the Semantic Web , 2012 .

[14]  Stuart Dunn,et al.  Methodological commons: arts and humanities e-Science fundamentals , 2010, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[15]  Marcia J. Bates The Fallacy of the Perfect Thirty-Item Online Search , 2016 .

[16]  Franz Lehner,et al.  Requirements Engineering as a Success Factor in Software Projects , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[17]  Martijn Kleppe,et al.  Eye Tracking the Use of a Collapsible Facets Panel in a Search Interface , 2013, TPDL.

[18]  Michael J. Muller,et al.  Participatory design: the third space in HCI , 2002 .

[19]  Roeland Ordelman Distributed Access to Oral History collections: Fitting Access Technology to the Needs of Collection Owners and Researchers , 2011, DH.

[20]  Laura Hollink,et al.  Bringing Parliamentary Debates to the Semantic Web , 2012, DeRiVE@ISWC.

[21]  Laura Hollink,et al.  PoliMedia: Analysing Media Coverage of Political Debates by Automatically Generated Links to Radio & Newspaper Items , 2013, Veni@OKCon.

[22]  Laura Hollink,et al.  Discovering Links between Political Debates and Media , 2013, ICWE.

[23]  John Bradley,et al.  What you (fore)see is what you get: Thinking about usage paradigms for computer assisted text analysis , 2005 .

[24]  Marco Tagliasacchi,et al.  HistoGraph -- A Visualization Tool for Collaborative Analysis of Networks from Historical Social Multimedia Collections , 2014, 2014 18th International Conference on Information Visualisation.

[25]  Phil Turner,et al.  Designing Interactive Systems: People, Activities, Contexts, Technologies , 2005 .

[26]  Martin Weller,et al.  The Digital Scholar , 2011 .

[27]  Jennifer Edmond,et al.  APIs and Researchers: The Emperor's New Clothes? , 2015 .

[28]  Temple Grandin,et al.  The Way I See It , 2015 .

[29]  Eric C. Kansa,et al.  Googling the Grey: Open Data, Web Services, and Semantics , 2010 .