page

NHC Summer Institute in Digital Textual Studies: Bibliography

This page is for participants in the NHC Summer Institute for Digital Textual Studies. Access to these documents is protected — you will need a username and password in order to view or download them.
Download All (114MB)

• Allison, S., R. Heuser, M. Jockers, F. Moretti, and M. Witmore. 2012. “Quantitative Formalism: An Experiment.” N+1, no. 13: 81–108.
• Anderson, C. 2008. “The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete.” Wired, June 23, 2008
• Arthur, Paul Longley and Katherine Bode. 2015. Advancing Digital Humanities: Research, Methods, Theories. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Blaxill, Luke. 2013. “Quantifying the language of British politics, 1880-1910”. Historical Research 86.232: 313-41
• Blevins, C. 2010. Topic Modeling: Martha Ballard’s Diary. April 1. 
• Block, S. 2006. “Doing More with Digitization: An Introduction to Topic Modeling of Early American Sources.” Common-place: The Interactive Journal of Early American Life 6, no. 2.
• Bode, Katherine and Paul Longley Arthur. 2015. “Collecting Ourselves”. In Arthur and Bode 2015: 1-12
• Bruner, Jerome. 1986. “Possible castles”. In Actual Minds, Possible Worlds. 44-54. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
• Burrows, John. 2010. “Never say always again: Reflections on the numbers game”. In Text and Genre in Reconstruction: Effects of Digitization on Ideas, Behaviours, Products and Institutions. Ed. Willard McCarty. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers
• Busa, R., S. J. 1976. “Why can a computer do so little?” ALLC Bulletin 4.1: 1-3.
• —. 1980. “The Annals of Humanities Computing: The Index Thomisticus”. Computers and the Humanities 14: 83-90
• Chang, J., J. Boyd-Graber, S. Gerrish, C. Wang, and D. Blei. 2009. “Reading Tea Leaves: How Humans Interpret Topic Models.” In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 22, 288–96. Proceedings of the 2009 conference. Norwich, UK: Curran Associates
• Cohen, Daniel J. and Roy Rosenzweig. 2005. “Promises and Perils of Digital History”. In Digital History: A Guide to Gathering, Preserving, and Presenting the Past on the Web. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press
• Drucker, Johanna. 2009. “Ivanhoe”. In Speclab: Digital Aesthetics and Products in Speculative Computing. 65-97. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Düring, Marten. 2014. “The Potential of Agent-Based Modelling for Historical Research”. In Complexity and the Human Experience: Modeling Complexity in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Ed. Paul A. Youngman and Mirsad Hadzikadic. 121-37. Boca Raton FL: Pan Stanford Publishing
• Epstein, Joshua M. 1999. “Agent-Based Computational Models and Generative Social Science”. Complexity 4.5: 41-60.
• Epstein, Joshua M. 2008. “Why model?” Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 11.4.
• Flanders, Julia. 2005. “Detailism, Digital Texts, and the Problem of Pedantry.” TEXT Technology 2: 41–70
• Flanders, Julia. 2009. “The Productive Unease of 21st-century Digital Scholarship”. Digital Humanities Quarterly 3.3
• Frye, Northrop. 1991. “Literary and Mechanical Models”. In Research in Humanities Computing 1. Selected papers from the 1989 ACH-ALLC Conference. Ed. Ian Lancashire. 3-12. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Galison, Peter. 2004. “Specific theory”. Critical Inquiry 30: 379-83
• Gavin, Michael. 2014. “Agent-Based Modeling and Historical Simulation”. Digital Humanities Quarterly 8.4.
• Ginzburg, Carlo. 1996. “Making Things Strange: The Prehistory of a Literary Device”. Representations 56: 8-28.
• Gooding, David. 1986. “How do scientists reach agreement about novel observations?” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 17.2: 205-230
• Gooding, David. 2003. “Varying the Cognitive Span: Experimentation, Visualization, and Computation”. In The Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation. Ed. Hans Radd. 255-301. Pittsburgh PA: University of Pittsburgh Press
• Grimmer, Justin and Brandon M. Stewart. 2013. “Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts”. Political Analysis 21: 267-97
• Hacking, Ian. 1983a. “Introduction: Rationality” (1-17) and “The creation of phenomena” (220-32). In Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Hacking, Ian. 1983b. “Experiment”. In Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. 149-66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Hacking, Ian. 1990. “The Argument”. The Taming of Chance. 1-10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Hacking, Ian. 2002. “‘Style’ for Historians and Philosophers”. In Historical Ontology. 178-99. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press
• Hoover, D. L. 2003a. “Another Perspective on Vocabulary Richness.” Computers and the Humanities 37, no. 2: 151–78
• Jockers, M., and D. M. Witten. 2010. “A Comparative Study of Machine Learning Methods for Authorship Attribution.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 25, no. 2: 215–23
• Jockers, Matthew. 2014. Text Analysis with R for Students of Literature. Springer Verlag.
• Keller, Evelyn Fox. 2002. “Synthetic biology redux – Computer simulation and artificial life”. Making Sense of Life: Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press
• Kenny, Anthony. 1992. “Computers and the humanities”. Ninth British Library Research Lecture. London: British Library
• Koppel, M., S. Argamon, and A. R. Shimoni. 2002. “Automatically Categorizing Written Texts by Author Gender.” Literary and Linguistic Computing 17, no. 4: 401–12
• Krippendorff, Klaus. 2004. “Introduction” and “History”. In Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications
• Kuhn, Thomas S. 1970/1962. “Introduction: A Role for History”. In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd enl. edn. 1-9. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
• Leff, Gordon. 1972. “Models inherent in History”. In The Rules of the Game: Cross-Disciplinary Essays on Models in Scholarly Thought. Ed. Teodor Shanin. London: Tavistock Publications
• Liu, Alan. 2012. “Where is cultural criticism in the digital humanities?” In Debates in the Digital Humanities. Ed. Matthew K. Gold. 492-509. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota Press
• Liu, Alan. 2014. “The Big Bang of Online Reading”. Arthur and Bode 2015: 274-90
• Mahoney, Michael S. 2005. “The histories of computing(s)”. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 30.2: 119-35
• McCarty, Willard. 2014. “Getting there from here: Remembering the future of digital humanities”. In Arthur and Bode 2015: 291-321.
• McCarty, Willard. 2014/2005. Rev edn. Humanities Computing. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• McCarty, Willard. [forthcoming 2015]. “Fictions of possibility: Simulation and ‘the course of ordinary terrestrial experience’”. In The Shape of Data in Digital Humanities: Modeling Texts and Text-based Materials. Ed. Julia Flanders and Fotis Jannidis. London: Ashgate.
• McCarty, Willard. [2016, forthcoming]. “Becoming interdisciplinary”. In A New Companion to Digital Humanities. Ed. Susan Schreibman, Ray Siemens and John Unsworth. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell
• McGann, Jerome. 2004. “Marking Texts of Many Dimensions”. In Schreibman, Siemens and Unsworth 2004: 198-217
• McGann, Jerome. 2013. “Philology in a New Key”. Critical Inquiry 39.2: 327-46
• McGann, Jerome. 2015 (forthcoming). “Truth and Method. Humanities Scholarship as a Science of Exceptions”. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 40.2.
• Michel, J.-B., Y. K. Shen, A. P. Aiden, A. Veres, M. K. Gray, W. Brockman, T. G. B. Team, et al. 2011. “Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books.” Science 331, no. 6014: 176–82
• Milic, Louis. 1966. “The next step”. Computers and the Humanities 1.1: 3-6
• Moretti, Franco. 2013. “‘Operationalizing’: or, the function of measurement in modern literary theory”. Literary Lab Pamphlet 6. Stanford CA: Stanford University.
• Nunberg, G. 2009. “Google Books: A Metadata Train Wreck.” In Language Log. University of Pennsylvania.
• Olsen, Mark. 1993. “Signs, Symbols and Discourses: A New Direction for Computer-Aided Literature Studies”. Computers and the Humanities 27: 309-14 [Earlier version delivered as a paper at the MLA in 1991]
• Potter, R. 1988. “Literary Criticism and Literary Computing.” Computers in the Humanities 22, no. 2
• Rommel, Thomas. 2004. “Literary Studies”. In Schreibman, Siemens and Unsworth 2004: 88-96
• Scarry, Elaine. 1992. “The Made-Up and the Made-Real”. Yale Journal of Criticism 5.2: 239-49
• Schilit, B., and O. Kolak. 2007. “Dive into the Meme Pool with Google Book Search.” In Inside Google Books. Blog
• Schulz, K. 2011. “Distant Reading.” New York Times, June 26, 2011
• Schreibman, Susan, Ray Siemens and John Unsworth, eds. 2004. A Companion to Digital Humanities. Oxford: Blackwells.
• Shanin, Teodor. 1972. “Models and Thought”. In The Rules of the Game: Cross-disciplinary Essays on Models in Scholarly Thought. Ed. Teodor Shanin. 1-22. London: Tavistock Publications
• Stone, Lawrence. 1979. “The Revival of Narrative: Reflections on a New Old History”. Past and Present 85: 3-24
• Stubbs, Michael. 2005. “Conrad in the computer: Examples of quantitative stylistic method”. Language and Literature 14.1: 5-24
• Tynjanov, J. 1978. “On Literary Evolution.” In Reading in Russian Formalism: Formalist and Structuralist Views, edited by L. Matejka and K. Pomorska. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications
• Wall, John N. 2014. “Transforming the Object of our Study: The Early Modern Sermon and the Virtual Paul’s Cross Project”. Journal of Digital Humanities 3.1
• Witmore, M. A. and J. Hope. 2007. Shakespeare by the Numbers: On the Linguistic Texture of the Late Plays. Edited by S. Mukherji and R. Lyne. Early Modern Tragicomedy. London: Boydell and Brewer