standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| second reading | alternatives | an independent re-reading of a facet, recorded whether or not it agrees |
| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| object of study | object_of_study | what the paper is about — the thing it investigates |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
| transfer | transfers | a method or concept carried in from another field |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 7 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| object_of_study | The citation and theory profile of digital art history compared with mainstream art history, read as an explanation of why the field has not adopted computational methods. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | object_of_study | the paper's words | |
| claim_type | mechanism Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | uptake of digital methods in art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | corpus-analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: corpus-analysis | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[3] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | Digital art history is not resisted because it is new but because the theory it imports is old - formalist and iconographic methods the field spent sixty years moving away from Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[4] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | Citing early art historians as if they were contemporaries strips the theories of their historical context and hides the ideological commitments built into them Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[5] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | The available image tools shape the questions asked, because they were built for classification and pattern-matching in other domains entirely Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[6] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | Iconographic analysis and nineteenth-century scientific practice share a historical root, so the tools and the revived theory reinforce each other Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[7] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | Frequency lists were generated over all names rather than a list the researchers supplied, specifically so the method could return names they had not thought of Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[8] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | Counting the number of ARTICLES an author appears in, rather than total mentions, stops one heavily citing article from standing in for a field Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[9] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The prominence of Walter Benjamin as the one author shared by all three samples is left unexplained, being outside the paper's scope. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the Benjamin result specifically: HIS SINGULAR PROMINENCE IN THE FIELD OF ART HISTORY AS REPRESENTED BY OUR SAMPLE - DESERVES A LONG[er treatment], left unexplained here | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Bias is built into the study because the researchers themselves had to decide what counted as a representative sample. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: every computational result in the paper, and in the genre: THE RESEARCHER MUST ALWAYS DEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTES A COMPLETE, COMPREHENSIVE OR REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE, WHICH MEANS THAT BIAS IS BUILT IN | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The computational methods are not described in technical detail in this article, being reported elsewhere. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: any methodological reuse of the study: WE HAVE CHOSEN NOT TO DESCRIBE OUR TEXT MINING METHODS IN TECHNICA[l detail], being aimed at a broad art history audience | limitations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The mainstream comparison rests on two journals chosen to reduce interdisciplinary noise, while the authors acknowledge art history is published far more widely Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the mainstream comparison: it rests on two journals chosen to reduce interdisciplinary noise, while ART HISTORY IS A DIVERSE, INTERDISCIPLINARY FIELD | limitations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Any computational humanities study builds in bias at the point where the sample is defined, which the authors state rather than claim to have avoided Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. duplicate of: limitations[1] · what this limits: the same scope as limitations[1] - bias enters where the sample is defined | limitations[4] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Text mining alone cannot say why a name appears, which is why the study needed close reading as a second layer Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: any interpretation of the mention counts: THEY DID NOT, HOWEVER, GIVE US ANY SENSE OF WHY THEY APPEAR so often, which is why close reading was added as a second layer | limitations[5] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The technical account of the text mining is not in this paper but in two earlier ones, so the method cannot be checked from this text alone Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. what this limits: the same scope as limitations[2] - the technical account of the text mining is in two earlier papers, so the method cannot be checked from this text | limitations[6] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The single author shared across all three samples, Benjamin, is set aside as beyond scope although he is the strongest signal in the data Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. duplicate of: limitations[0] · what this limits: the same scope as limitations[0] - Benjamin, the one author shared across all three samples and the strongest signal in the data, is set aside as beyond scope | limitations[7] | the tagger's words | |
| transfers | text mining, a method the authors note is common in other disciplines but rare in art history, is turned back onto art-historical writing itself to study the discipline's own historiography Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | transfers[0] | the tagger's words | |
| controls | frequency lists produced over ALL names in the corpus, ordered by frequency, instead of searching the material for the key concepts and names the researchers could think of Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: CONFIRMATION BY THE ANALYST - the paper's own phrase is 'looking to confirm a theme or pattern'. A search for names you already have in mind returns them, and the enumeration removes the step where salience is decided by the reader · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | digital art history - Baca and Helmreich's wide sense: five overlapping phases beginning with digitization of archives Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | digital art history - Drucker's narrow sense: analytic computational techniques ONLY, explicitly excluding digitized repositories Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | digital art history - as this paper uses it: the wider sense, adopted by explicit decision after setting out the alternatives Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | citation frequency - number of ARTICLES an author is cited in, which is what every number here means Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | citation frequency - total mentions, the alternative that was tried and rejected because one article could then stand in for a field Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[4] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | novelty of DAH - as its supporters mean it: new questions and new kinds of information about art Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[5] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | novelty of DAH - as its critics mean it: a symptom of new public management and the urge to quantify everything Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[6] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| alternatives | phenomenon: uptake of digital methods in art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. a second reading reaching the same value. Recorded: uptake of digital methods in art history — note: a second reading reaching the same value from a different sentence. Not applied - a person decides. | alternatives.phenomenon | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | extends → Johanna Drucker's definition of digital art history in 'Is There a "Digital" Art History?' Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Paul Jaskot's question about which critical art-historical questions suit digital methods Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | critiques → Manovich's argument that computational methods can approach scientific objectivity in the humanities Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | critiques → the positioning of digital art history as a methodological innovation new to the discipline Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[3] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | extends → Drucker's distinction between digitized and digital art history, adopted as a distinction but not as a boundary Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[4] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | supports → Jaskot's question about which critical art-historical questions are best suited to digital methods Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[5] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | critiques → Bishop's Against Digital Art History, whose diagnosis the paper shares while rejecting the conclusion that computation is inherently incompatible Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS WHETHER THE DIAGNOSIS IMPLIES THE STRONGER CONCLUSION. 'WHILE THIS ARTICLE CRITIQUES THE ADHERENCE OF DAH RESEARCH TO THE OLD GUARD OF ART HISTORY, THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THE USE OF COMPUTATIONAL TOOLS IS INHERENTLY INCOMPATIBLE with contemporary critical theory perspectives in the discipline.' The paper shares the critics' diagnosis and refuses their conclusion, in one sentence - which is exactly the position this project occupies, and its [5] supplies the historical reason (DAH inherited the formalist half of the discipline). | claim_relations[6] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | digital art history —distinct-from→ digitized art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but attributed: the span quotes Drucker. also in: digital art history · digitized art history | concept_edges[0] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | text mining —same-as→ distant reading Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span speaks of 'the distant reading of text mining'; same-as is loose. also in: text mining · distant reading | concept_edges[1] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | EVIDENCE CORRECTED (RE-GROUNDED) · text mining —contrasted-with→ close reading Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. EVIDENCE CORRECTED: RE-GROUNDED. The old span named neither method. This sentence names both and states the contrast SYMMETRICALLY - neither method could have produced the other's result, which is a stronger and more careful claim than a one-way comparison. — strength of the relation: 1 also in: text mining · close reading | concept_edges[2] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | critical theory —distinct-from→ digital art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: THE AXIS IS WHICH PRE-DIGITAL TRADITION THE DIGITAL METHOD INHERITS. 'as this study shows, Quotation withheld commonly found in more [recent work].' Digital art history is not opposed to critical theory by argument - it INHERITED A DIFFERENT ANCESTOR, and the claim is historical rather than methodological. · strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span writes 'DAH' and ties it to formalist rather than critical theory methods; distinct-from is loose. also in: critical theory · digital art history | concept_edges[5] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | Erwin Panofsky —is-a→ iconographic Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span groups Panofsky with iconographic approaches; is-a is loose. also in: Erwin Panofsky · iconographic | concept_edges[7] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | exploratory data analysis —same-as→ unsupervised learning Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 1 also in: exploratory data analysis · unsupervised learning | concept_edges[9] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | digital art history —distinct-from→ canon Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.9
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its span and kept, but the span says DAH often fails to acknowledge a widened canon; distinct-from is loose. also in: digital art history · canon | concept_edges[11] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | frequency count Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: frequency count | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | text mining (word-frequency analysis in R) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Across the three article corpora, Walter Benjamin was the single author cited in common by all three. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Apart from Benjamin, Art Journal had no author overlap with DAH. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The two mainstream art-history journals resemble each other far more than either resembles DAH, and Art Journal is the more distant of the two from DAH. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Besides Benjamin, only Erwin Panofsky, Aby Warburg and Hans Belting are shared between the Art History and DAH citation lists. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Wolfflin is not frequently cited in either the Art History or the Art Journal sample, but often appears in DAH literature. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | By omitting critique of Panofsky, DAH literature seems to treat his work as the final word until digitization. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Computational studies are closely tied to very particular, very traditional pre-digital methods and theories of art history. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | DAH appears to de-historicize art-historical theories and methods. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | An unremarked assumption, also a barrier in Manovich's methodology as generally applied, is that digital images of artworks are true to the artworks' brightness, hue and saturation. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | only one author, Walter Benjamin, is shared across all three samples Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | besides Benjamin, digital art history shares no author with Art Journal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[10] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Wölfflin is prominent in digital art history and largely absent from both mainstream journals Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[11] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | the two mainstream journals resemble each other more than either resembles digital art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[12] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | computational art history is not qualitatively different from analogue art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[13] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | DAH typically cites Benjamin's famous essay without further analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[14] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | digital art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: digital art history | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | meta-methodology Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: meta-methodology | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | text mining Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: text mining | content_tags.definitions[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Kunstgeschichte ohne Namen Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Kunstgeschichte ohne Namen | content_tags.definitions[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | digitized art history Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: digitized art history | content_tags.definitions[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | exploratory data analysis Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: exploratory data analysis | content_tags.definitions[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | meta-methodology Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: meta-methodology | content_tags.definitions[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 61 — articles in the combined digital-art-history corpus (two Visual Resources special issues plus DAHJ 2015-2019) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 373 / 215 — articles drawn from Art History and from Art Journal for the 2010-2019 comparison corpora Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | thirty-five — number of top cited scholars extracted per corpus and compared in the Venn diagram Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 100 — length of the most-frequent-word list produced for each dataset after stopword removal Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | top thirty-five scholars — the size of the citation list compared across the three samples Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 2010 and 2019 — the decade of mainstream art history sampled Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | three overlapping authors — the entire shared ground between DAH and Art History besides Benjamin Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | five ‘roughly chronological’ and overlapping phases — the structure of the wide definition of the field Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[7] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.