1,720,966 research outputs found
Exploring the Digital Humanities: An Interview with Mark Algee-Hewitt, Ph.D.
Full text linkMark Algee-Hewitt is an Assistant Professor in the department of English and the Co-Director of the Stanford Literary Lab. His work focuses on the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries in England and Germany and seeks to combine literary criticism with digital and quantitative analyses of literary texts. In particular, he is interested in the history of aesthetic theory and the development and transmission of aesthetic and philosophic concepts during the Enlightenment and Romantic periods. He is also interested in the relationship between aesthetic theory and the poetry of the long eighteenth century. At the Literary Lab, Dr. Algee-Hewitt leads projects on suspense literature, the relationship between titles and texts in the long eighteenth century, and gender performance in the dialogue of novels written during the Romantic period. He is also a collaborator on the Canon/Archive project, Micromegas, the Transhistorical Poetry project, Modeling Dramatic Networks, and a project on the Supreme Court and Environmental Law. Outside of Stanford, Dr. Algee-Hewitt is a partner in the ongoing NovelTM partnership grant and is an associate principal investigator of the Stanford branch of the Global Currents Digging into Data project. Building on this work, he has ongoing collaborations with Andrew Piper at the .txt lab at McGill University in Montreal, and with the North American Concept Lab, based at New York University. He is also a member of the executive board of 18thConnect and is on the visualization advisory committee of the Digital Mitford project
DH and Me
No full textI’m in Indianapolis for HILT 2015. The digital-humanities workshop on “Large-Scale Text Analysis with R” sounded as if it can help me to finally surmount the obstacle of several thousands of neuroscientific articles I will have to analyze in order to continue my project on adult neurogenesis. Mark Algee-Hewitt from Stanford’s Department of English is an awesome instructor and thus far, I’ve understood everything and was even able to ask a not-so-stupid question during the first session. (Why ..
DH and Me
No full textI’m in Indianapolis for HILT 2015. The digital-humanities workshop on “Large-Scale Text Analysis with R” sounded as if it can help me to finally surmount the obstacle of several thousands of neuroscientific articles I will have to analyze in order to continue my project on adult neurogenesis. Mark Algee-Hewitt from Stanford’s Department of English is an awesome instructor and thus far, I’ve understood everything and was even able to ask a not-so-stupid question during the first session. (Why ..
Villainous or valiant? Depictions of oil and coal in American fiction and nonfiction narratives
No full text
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
