Domain

Academic philosophy is a discipline with a rich variety of objects of research, theoretical approaches, and intellectual traditions. Our discipline therefore has a large number of sub‐disciplines, which are often clustered into three discrete domains, namely the history of philosophy, theoretical philosophy, and practical philosophy. Sub‐disciplines include aesthetics, ethics, epistemology, logic, the philosophy of language, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, social philosophy, and political philosophy. Some of these have strong interdisciplinary relationships with the humanities (literature, linguistics, (art) history), the social and behavioural sciences (e.g. political science, sociology, cognitive psychology), the formal sciences (mathematics, informatics) and the natural sciences (physics, biology). This is also reflected in their research culture. The Dutch Research School of Philosophy OZSW is the platform for cooperation and communication between the various domains and sub‐disciplines in philosophy.

 

Audiences

Academic philosophy in the Netherlands has a strong international orientation, while also being wellconnected to national public debates and professional practices. Communication among our international community of researchers takes place chiefly in writing by means of academic journals and books. With the general public there is often lively interaction via magazines, newspapers, books, collections, blogs, public debates, etc. In the field of ethics there is much collaboration with professionals, especially in the area of health care and engineering, which takes place through various channels including professional education, reports and conferences.

 

Products

• Academic publications usually take the form of monographs, articles in international philosophy journals, collections of essays, and contributions to handbooks or encyclopaedias. In some subdisciplines of philosophy, such as logic, published conference proceedings are also important.
• Journal publications are mostly written for specialist areas of research and, as such, journals may have a certain profile corresponding to a specific approach in philosophy or an intellectual tradition.
• Translations of original work are an important practice in the use and transfer of knowledge for certain fields of philosophy.
• In some areas of philosophy products may have a hybrid character, reflecting a need to focus on both academic and general audiences.
• In the history of philosophy editorial work is an important part of our research, often resulting in new editions of earlier works.
• English is the language most often used in our international publications such as journals and books. In some areas, however, it is also important to publish in the language of the philosopher being studied e.g., to publish about Kant in German and about Merleau‐Ponty in French and in other areas of philosophy Dutch language publications are relevant.

 

Review process and authorship

• Peer review processes are of great importance for the academic rigour of national and international publications, in the form of editorial review or (double blind) referee review. This holds for articles in journals, monographs, collections of essays, etc.

• The most common form of authorship of written output is the single‐authored publication (though co‐authored publications are on the rise). This applies both to journal articles and books (monographs) which usually have a longer throughput time than multi‐authored publications in other disciplines.

• Unlike many other sciences, in philosophy co‐authorship requires that a substantial part of the actual writing was done by the co‐author and so discussing, commenting upon, and suggesting revisions for articles written by PhD students and junior colleagues usually does not result in coauthorship.

 

Domain-specific aspects

Collaboration with professionals and communication with the general public often takes the form of hybrid (book) publications, participation in public debates, contributions to magazines and blogs, and through reports for professional organisations and the government.

 

Status of quality indicators

The quality indicators specified in the document “Quality Indicators for Philosophy” have been compiled by a panel consisting of the chairs of the three chambers of the OZSW (History of Philosophy, Theoretical Philosophy, and Ethics and Practical Philosophy) and the chair of the OZSW board. These indicators were discussed in the three chambers. More than OZSW 75 members participated in this process. The indicators were authorised by the board of the OZSW in September 2018. Indicators authorised by panels of other disciplines may be relevant for philosophy in the case of interdisciplinary research.

 

Relevance of quantitative indicators

Bibliometric indicators such as citation analyses and H‐indices can only be used for those parts of philosophy that aim for publications that are properly indexed in the Web of Science or Scopus. For the remaining parts of philosophy these indicators are rarely useful, even if they are based on Google Scholar, because not all publication channels are indexed and current reference practices are often too diverse.

 

We refer to the OZSW website for a description of the quality indicators for philosophy and for the current lists of journals and publishers with an explanation on how to use these.

Domain

Cultural history is a broad and dynamic discipline, which can flexibly accommodate emerging topics and concerns. It is distinguished from other historical disciplines by its focus on culture as a process of attributing meaning. Taking a lead from Johan Huizinga, we understand culture as a system of ‘life forms’: usages, values, opinions, practices, objects, arts and knowledge, which may exist within a group and to which the group attaches meaning. Cultural history is distinguished by the very diverse range of sources it documents and uses (such as various kinds of text, images, music, smells, performativity, and heritage, both material and immaterial). Cultural history is also distinct from the field of Cultural studies because of its focus on historicity and the historical method, emphasizing historical dynamics and processes of change, interaction and appropriation across time and space. Cultural history is above all an interdisciplinary subject: within the Humanities it combines concepts and methods from history, art history, literature, theatre studies, book history, and more, and seeks interaction outside the Humanities with the social sciences (e.g. through cultural anthropology), with the natural and medical sciences (through the history of science and medical humanities), and with computer sciences (digital humanities). Within this disciplinary field,  new approaches, focus points and specialisms emerge periodically . Given the importance of culture for processes of identification, the history of identity also occupies an important place in the discipline. Although much of the Institute’s work is on historical events which take place outside the Netherlands,  since the time of Johan Huizinga there has been a powerful academic tradition of cultural history focusing on culture in the Netherlands and its connections with Europe and the wider world,  together with a significant outreach  to the Dutch public.

The Huizinga Institute serves as a national research network for Cultural History.

 

Target groups

• Cultural History has close ties with national societies and cultures and with scholars of Cultural History in other countries. Some publications focus on the Dutch public and on professionals both within and outside academia.
• In addition, researchers in this domain target specialist peers and a broad spectrum of researchers in their own and other related disciplines.

 

Products and communication

• Monographs are the most prestigious research products in the domain of Cultural History. Chief among them are scholarly monographs published by an internationally recognised academic publisher, but also ‘hybrid’ book publications (if successful) focusing on both academic and non-academic readers.
• Other important communication channels are edited volumes and proceedings on interrelated themes addressing peers.
• Journal articles are meant for an international readership, although some also address a national audience. The most important titles among the many journals being published are those meant to communicate with peers in subdomains or subdisciplines.
• Review processes are very important to publishing in the domain, including the publication of books and edited volumes, and may consist of standard (anonymised) peer reviews or of strict editorial review procedures.
• Scholarly output can also be communicated in the form of lectures, exhibitions, creative products or datasets.

 

Processes and strategies

• Monographs intended for international publishers may require several years of work and are generally only feasible at a later stage of a researcher’s career.
• Hybrid publications are regularly accompanied by lectures and appearances before scholarly, professional and general audiences, radio and television appearances and blogging (on the web).
• Single-authorship is the dominant form, but multi-author publications are becoming more common.
• Researchers make use of various forms of publication, leading to diversity in publication media (journal articles, monographs, essays in edited volumes, and so on).

 

Domain-specific aspects of quality and relevance

Hybrid publications, specifically books, target academic researchers, professionals and other interested parties.

 

Relevance of indicators for products

The Huizinga panel has authorised various publication channels for journals and books. To some extent they have been divided into subdomains, but others are also regarded as characteristic for Cultural History as a whole. The publication channels have been specified by target group. The multidisciplinary nature of this domain means that indicators authorised by other panels are also relevant. Link to lists

 

Relevance of quantitative indicators for use and marks of recognition

• Since established databases (e.g. Web of Science, Scopus) register few journals and no monographs as sources, we do not recommend using bibliometric data from these databases. In relevant cases, it may be possible to trace monograph citations using Google Scholar. However, Google Scholar is not regarded as representative for publications in the domain of Cultural History, and caution is therefore advised.
• In addition to Google Scholar, it is also possible to analyse the impact of hybrid publications by conducting internet searches of societal and scholarly users.

Domain

Economic and Social History differs from the broader field of history in its strong emphasis on empiricism, its distinct quantitative component, and the fact that it is inspired by approaches in the social sciences. It seeks interdisciplinary engagement with other domains, for example economics, sociology and anthropology, with the medical domain, for example epidemiology, or with domains that are themselves interdisciplinary in nature, such as cultural studies. Economic and Social History actively maintains links with these domains. The research culture therefore displays both domain-specific features and strong ties with other domains. The N.W. Posthumus Institute (NWP), a research school, functions as the national network for researchers and PhD students.

 

Target groups

• Economic and Social History has close ties with national societies and cultures and with scholars in other countries. Many publications focus on the Dutch public and on professionals both within and outside academia.
• On the other hand, the communication pattern in Economic and Social History tends to resemble that of the social sciences. That means that communication emphasises peers in the domain and that researchers often cooperate with other disciplines in the social sciences and humanities.

 

Products and communication

• Journal publications are the most important form of communication in those areas of specialisation that lean towards the social sciences, for example Economic History, Historical Demography and History of Technology, although researchers also publish monographs. In terms of numbers, essays in edited volumes and journal articles are important.
• Monographs are the most prestigious products in Social History, either scholarly works published by a recognised academic publisher or as ‘hybrid’ book publications (if successful) focusing on both academic and non-academic readers.
• Other important communication channels are edited volumes and proceedings on interrelated themes addressing peers.
• Journal publications increasingly target an international readership. The most important titles among the many journals being published are those meant to communicate with peers in subdomains or subdisciplines.
• Other products and forms of communication include book reviews and the development and maintenance of large-scale databases.
• Review processes are very important to publishing in the domain, including the publication of books and edited volumes, and may consist of standard (anonymised) peer reviews or of strict editorial review procedures.

 

Processes and strategies

• Monographs intended for international publishers require several years of work and are generally only feasible at a later stage of a researcher’s career.
• Hybrid publications are regularly accompanied by lectures and appearances before scholarly, professional and general audiences, radio and television appearances and blogging (on the web).
• Single-authorship is the dominant form for monographs. Co-authored articles are growing more common in journal publications.
• Researchers make use of various forms of publication, leading to diversity in publication media (journal articles, monographs, essays in edited volumes, and so on).

 

Domain-specific aspects of quality and relevance

Hybrid publications, specifically books, target academic researchers, professionals and other interested parties.

 

Relevance of indicators for products

The NWP panel has authorised various publication channels for journals and books, differentiated by target group. The panel has not differentiated these channels by subdomain. The multidisciplinary nature of this domain means that indicators authorised by other panels are also relevant. Link to lists

 

Relevance of quantitative indicators for use and marks of recognition

• Since established databases (e.g. Web of Science, Scopus) register few journals and no monographs as sources, we do not recommend using bibliometric data from these databases. In relevant cases, it may be possible to trace monograph citations using Google Scholar. Google Scholar may well be suitable for extracting bibliometric data pertaining to subdomains that publish mainly in international journals. It may be necessary to investigate whether these journals are adequately represented in this source, however.
• In addition to Google Scholar, it is also possible to analyse the impact of hybrid publications by conducting internet searches of societal and scholarly users.

Domain profiles are meant to support those writing the narrative part of the self-assessment report. Profiles help them account for both similarities and differences between the research unit and customary practices in the domain. 

The research cultures in the various humanities domains are rather diverse in some respects, but they are also highly similar owing to the interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary nature of many domains. 

The accompanying pages provide a brief description of the research culture in every domain, based on information provided by the domain panels and as described in the relevant research school’s annual reports and other documents. 

Grateful use has also been made of NWO’s study of the publication cultures in the humanities, issued in December 2016. 

 

Domain

Is this a specialist or a multidisciplinary domain?

Which school is active in this domain?

Are there links with other domains in the humanities?

 

Audiences

Which audiences are relevant in this domain, e.g. peers, professionals, policymakers or interested members of the public?

Are these international or national audiences?

 

Products and communication

What are typical products, e.g. books, articles or otherwise?

Is there a difference in the effort required to create such products?

In what languages do publications appear?

How important is publishing in Dutch?

What review processes are relevant?

 

Processes and strategies

Who are the products intended for and what consequences does that have for the relevant production efforts?

Are these ‘single-authored’ or co-authored publications?

 

Domain-specific aspects of quality and relevance

What typical research outcomes are specifically relevant in this domain?

 

Relevance of indicators for products

Are the QRiH indicators of other panels relevant in this domain?

 

Relevance of quantitative indicators for use of research products and marks of recognition

Can bibliometric indicators, such as citation analysis, be used?