Search

Preserving semantics is particularly complex when the scope of sharing is interdisciplinary, given the inherent idiosyncrasies of different knowledge communities. One potential solution to transcend disciplinary boundaries involves the use of the ontological approach to modulating new knowledge organization systems. Using top-level ontologies or ontological meta-models as umbrella structures for other systems of smaller scope is an example of the application of such an approach in an interdisciplinary context. Although some applications do exist, a generalized adequacy to different epistemic perspectives is, within postmodern culture, regarded with great scepticism. Contrary to this issue of incommensurability, the existence of a common horizon for scientific practice is presented as feasible and not an impediment to the integration of different perspectives. This requires differentiating between statements of what exists (ontology) and test criteria (methodology), and not discarding or confusing the three schemes (perceptual, conceptual and linguistic) involved in the relationship between subjects and their milieu. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Digital Humanities are generally considered as the application of digital methods and technologies to the more traditional areas of Humanities studies. The main objective of this work is to investigate whether and how three-dimensional (3D) digitization contributes to the affirmation of Digital Humanities. Our specific objectives were to suggest a definition for DH and 3D Digitization and to reflect on how these two defined concepts work together. In a first phase, we reflect on the state of the art and to this end we used specialized bibliography. Subsequently, an analysis was made of websites relevant to the subject in question. The article includes a reflection on the theme to be addressed, for which method research and document analysis wase used. The main results and conclusions of this investigation allow us to say that 3D scanning revolutionizes the way in which research in Humanities is done today because it allows us to see different perspectives of what has already existed, enabling advances in research and investigation. This is a new way of approaching the past, but projecting into the future. New fields and research topics are emerging and modern and attractive teaching materials are being created. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The approach to epistemic cultures exposes the differences in the construction of the processes of production and creation of knowledge between the different academic fields, which, in turn, implies the fragmentation of knowledge. The digital humanities are an inter and transdisciplinary field composed of different epistemic cultures marked by different knowledge production practices that differ from each other. In the current scenario of academic communication, the discourse around open practices in the course of research has increasingly taken a prominent place. However, this discourse, under the open science paradigm, proves to be more framed in the context of the epistemic cultures of science, and does not fully consider other domains of knowledge. This study aims to frame the epistemic cultures of the digital humanities in the discourse of openness of knowledge, through a literature review about digital humanities and open science. Its conclusion points to the need to adopt a specific discourse around the openness of knowledge, which considers the diversity of academic communication practices, including those that are specific to the humanities, as well as to the fact that the digital humanities can contribute to the consolidation of this discourse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preliminary study on the impact of Open Science in the scientific cycle, from the beginning of the research to its publication, seeking to know, describe and explain the perceptions of a group of researchers regarding the Open Science ecosystem. A qualitative methodology was used, through a semi-structured interview. The results identify the researchers' doubts regarding the fulfilment of Open Science's premises. The systematization of their ideas allows us to question if they are prepared for these new experiences in the field of science and if they have the skills to ensure their autonomy to identify where to publish, how to publish, how to manage scientific data, how to disseminate research results, how and why to choose formal and informal channels of science, how to use technologies for the benefit of their visibility and, finally, how to ensure the perennity of their scientific production. Also, the new language used in Open Science raises many difficulties for researchers. Creating training programs for researchers is a strategic goal for the implementation process of this science paradigm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]