Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Digitale historische archiefresearch× | Vergelijkend historisch archiefonderzoek× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Veldmethoden | Veldmethoden |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1990s–2000s (as digital archives became widely accessible) | Late 19th century (archival foundations); mid-20th century (comparative systematic application) |
| Grondlegger≠ | Emerging practice across digital humanities scholars; Roy Rosenzweig among early proponents | Leopold von Ranke (archival history); Theda Skocpol, Barrington Moore (comparative-historical synthesis) |
| Type≠ | Qualitative historical research design | Qualitative comparative research design |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Theimer, K. (2012). What is the Meaning of Archives 2.0? American Archivist, 75(1), 58–68. DOI ↗ | Skocpol, T. (1979). States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge University Press. ISBN: 978-0521294997 |
| Aliassen | digital archival research, digital archive history, online archival research, digital humanities archival method | comparative-historical analysis, cross-national archival research, comparative archival history, CHAR |
| Verwant≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Digital historical archival research is the systematic investigation of the past using digitized primary sources held in online repositories, digital archives, and electronic databases. It combines the interpretive principles of traditional historical archival research with digital tools for search, retrieval, text mining, and visualization, enabling researchers to access geographically dispersed collections, apply computational analysis to large corpora, and reconstruct historical events, processes, and social phenomena from preserved primary evidence. | Comparative historical archival research combines systematic examination of primary archival sources across two or more historical cases — nations, regions, institutions, or time periods — to identify causal patterns, structural similarities, and divergences that single-case histories cannot reveal. It is the method of choice when researchers want to explain why similar or different outcomes emerged across distinct historical contexts using documentary evidence. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|