Academic committee

The Scientific Board for Hypotheses and its foreign language counterparts work with the OpenEdition team to determine the platform’s direction and strategy. The Board also helps review applications for new blogs.

Meet the members of the Scientific Board for Hypotheses and its foreign language counterparts

Hypotheses’ Scientific Board

Etienne Bourel
Doctorant en anthropologie, LADEC – université Lumière Lyon 2
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : L’atelier du Tamis et Carnets de Terrain

Amélie Derome
Doctorante en littérature britannique, Aix-Marseille Université
Enseignante d’anglais, Université Paris-Nanterre
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Il faut que jeunesse se passe

Déborah Dubald
ATER en histoire des sciences, université de Strasbourg
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : History, on the road

Mathieu Jacomy
Doctorant en techno-anthropologie sur l’analyse visuelle de réseaux, TANT-Lab, Copenhague
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Reticular

François Jacquesson
Linguiste
Directeur de recherche CNRS, Centre d’Etudes Himalayennes
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Caramel

Olivier Jacquot
Responsable de la coordination de la recherche, Bibliothèque nationale de France
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : Carnet de la recherche à la Bibliothèque nationale de France et Amoxcalli

Mareike Koenig – Invitée permanente, représentante du Conseil scientifique germanophone d’Hypothèses
Directrice des départements Humanités numériques et XIXe siècle, Institut historique allemand
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : Digital Humanities à l’IHA et Das 19. Jahrhundert in Perspektive

Marie-Laure Legay
Professeur d’histoire moderne, UMR CNRS IRHIS – université de Lille
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Dictionnaire encyclopédique de la Ferme générale (1640-1794)

Bertrand Mocquet
Expert numérique, Agence de Mutualisation des Universités et Etablissements (AMUE)
Chercheur, MICA – université Bordeaux Montaigne
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Une vision de la transformation numérique

Caroline Muller
Maîtresse de conférences en histoire contemporaine, université Rennes 2
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : Acquis de conscience et Espaces réflexifs, situés, diffractés et enchevêtrés

Marine Parra
Doctorante en lettres et littérature française, ILLE – université de Haute Alsace
ATER, TEMOS – université Bretagne Sud
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : “Jardin” de poésie et Eveille

Marie-Anne Paveau
Professeure en linguistique française, université Paris 13
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : La pensée du discours et Technologies discursives

Patrick Peccatte
Informaticien, chercheur indépendant en études visuelles
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Déjà Vu

Lissell Quiroz
Professeure en études latino-américaines et directrice adjointe de l’UFR Langues et Études Internationales, CY Cergy Paris Université
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Perspectives décoloniales d’Abya Yala

Olivier Ritz
Maître de conférences en littérature française, université de Paris
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Littérature et Révolution

Benoît Roux
Docteur en histoire moderne
Ingénieur d’études, ERIAC – université de Rouen Normandie
Carnets de recherche sur Hypothèses : Kalínago et L’Atelier des savoirs

Luis Velasco-Pufleau
Marie Skłodowska-Curie Global Fellow, université de Berne / université McGill
Carnet de recherche sur Hypothèses : Music, Sound and Conflict

Deutscher Wissenschaftsrat

Dr. Jürgen Danyel
Jürgen Danyel ist stellvertretender Direktor des Zentrums für zeithistorische Forschung in Potsdam und Leiter der Abteilung „Zeitgeschichte der Medien- und Informationsgesellschaft“ am ZZF.

Prof. Dr. Gudrun Gersmann
Gudrun Gersmann ist Professorin für die Geschichte der Frühen Neuzeit an der Universität zu Köln. Sie ist an Konzeption und Leitung der e-journals und online Portale zeitenblicke.de, lesepunkte.de, historicum.net und recensio.net beteiligt.

Gregor Horstkemper
Gregor Horstkemper ist an der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek für die „Fachinformation Geschichte“ zuständig und leitet das Zentrum für Elektronisches Publizieren, in dem an Online-Angeboten wie historicum.net, perspectivia.net und recensio.net mitgearbeitet wird.

Prof. Dr. Martin Huber
Martin Huber ist Literaturwissenschaftler an der Universität Bayreuth und seit 2000 Herausgeber der elektronischen Zeitschrift IASLonline.

Dr. Michael Kaiser
Michael Kaiser ist Frühneuzeithistoriker und verantwortlicher Redakteur von perspectivia.net. Er ist weiterhin engagiert bei der online-Publikationen zeitenblicke.de, lesepunkte.de und sehepunkte.de.

Prof. Dr. Hubertus Kohle
Hubertus Kohle ist Professor für Kunstgeschichte in München und interessiert sich für alles, was mit den Perspektiven des Digitalen in seinem Fach zu tun hat. Er bloggt auf blog.arthistoricum.net.

Prof. Dr. Claudine Moulin
Claudine Moulin ist Germanistin und Digital Humanist; sie arbeitet als Sprachhistorikerin und Mediävistin und leitet das Trier Center for Digital Humanities.

Prof. Dr. Eva Pfanzelter
Eva Pfanzelter ist Historikerin mit den Forschungs- und Arbeitsschwerpunkten Europäische Geschichte nach 1945 und Digtal Humanities. Sie ist Assistenzprofessorin am Institut für Zeitgeschichte der Universität Innsbruck und führt das Blog holocaustwebsites.hypotheses.org.

Prof. Dr. Andrea Rapp
Andrea Rapp ist Professorin für germanistische Computerphilologie an der TU Darmstadt. Sie bloggt im DHd-Blog, bei der Ordensgeschichte sowie bei Scriptorum.

Ehemalige Mitglieder

PD Dr. Peter Haber (1964-2013)
Peter Haber war Privatdozent für Allgemeine Geschichte der Neuzeit am Historischen Seminar der Universität Basel und war 1998 Mitbegründer von hist.net, einer internationalen Plattform für Geschichte und Digitale Medien (http://hist.net/peter-haber).

Prof. Dr. Gerhard Lauer
Gerhard Lauer ist Literaturwissenschaftler und arbeitet als Literaturhistoriker wie als Digital humanist. Er leitet das Göttingen Centre for Digital Humanities.

Consejo Científico Español

Elena Azofra
Profesora de Filología en la UNED, Madrid.
Morflog
Espaces Réflexifs

Felipe Castro
Profesor e investigador, Instituto de Investigaciones Históricas, UNAM, México.
Sociedad indiana

José Manuel Fradejas Rueda
Profesor del Dpto. de Lengua Española. Universidad de Valladolid.
7 partidas digital

Francisco García Jurado
Profesor de Filología latina en la Universidad Complutense de Madrid.
Reinventar la Antigüedad

Nicolás Quiroga
Investigador independiente (Movimientos sociales y sistyemas políticos) en CONICET, Argentina
GIMSSPAM

Gimena del Río
Investigadora asistente Seminario de Edición y Crítica Textual (SECRIT-IIBICRIT CONICET), Buenos Aires.

Nuria Rodríguez Ortega
Directora del Departamento de Historia del Arte, Universidad de Málaga.

English Scientific Board

Anne Baillot
Full Professor of German Studies, Le Mans Université
Hypotheses blogs: Digital Intellectuals, 140 Caractères and Wikipedia and the Humanities

Annika Rockenberger
Doctoral Research Fellow, Dept. of Literature, Area Studies and European Languages, University of Oslo
Hypotheses blog: Greflinger – Digitale Edition

Danny Millum
Deputy Editor, Reviews in History and Editorial Assistant (Web), University of London

Franziska Heimburger
Senior Lecturer, Paris-Sorbonne
Hypotheses blog: Histoire(s) de 14-18

Guido Koller
Senior Historian, Swiss Federal Archives, Berne
Hypotheses blog: We think History

Lisa Smith
Lecturer in Digital History, University of Essex
Hypotheses blogs: The Recipes Project, EMROC, and The Digital Recipe Books Project

Marin Dacos
Director, Centre for Open  Electronic Publishing

Pierre Mounier
Deputy director – International development, Centre for Open Electronic Publishing

 

Hypotheses through the Eyes of Its Scientific Board

A brief overview of the Hypotheses Scientific Board

The Hypotheses Scientific Board act as facilitators to the platform. Our goal is to promote, encourage, and foster the publication of research blogs. Currently, the Board is composed of 14 humanities and social science academics who work in collaboration with the OpenEdition team.

The Board helps the team maintain the connection between blogging and all aspects of research. We prefer bloggers to have an affiliation with academia, but we also encourage authors to express and clarify their perspectives and viewpoints and to experiment outside the boundaries of conventional forms of academic writing.

We are also mindful of the ethics of research as well as of publication and communication on the Hypotheses platform.

Blogging

Blogs allow you to write in unique and varied formats. You should feel free to experiment with hyperlinks1 and with multimedia by including images, videos, and audio files in your posts. The ability to combine text with pictures, video, and sound is one of the benefits of native digital publishing.

A blog is also a space for authors to showcase their work in a way that puts their stamp on it, by documenting their starts and stops, their uncertainties and questions, and the inductive exploration characteristic of any research process. In this way, science blogs act as an online “home,”2 and reading them can feel like an exploration.

Research blogs are also the ideal way to break down barriers between modes of discourse. Posts are not articles, exactly, since they do not have all the tedium of footnotes and long bibliographies. Neither are they commentaries like newspaper articles or op-ed columns, as their scientific nature does not lend itself to high-minded rhetoric or polemics, nor are they simply a link to a resource. And yet they have some of the traits of all three of their cousins.

At the end of the day, research blogs are a place for “approachable science,” as André Gunthert called it, referring to science that is readable, educational, shareable, and accessible to general audiences.

If you have any issues while using our blogging program, the OpenEdition team is here to help. We have developed a number of resources that are available to you for free.

Blogs we love

Research blogs come in all shapes and sizes, but here are some common traits that make a blog great:

Educational digital3 posts on current thought processes

Sources not available anywhere else: unpublished manuscripts (with context), survey results, etc. (see example here)

Descriptions of current research experiences

Reports (can be subjective, with commentary) on conference sessions, workshops, symposia, publications, etc. (see examples here and here)

Reports on field work and methodological issues (see example here)

Reviews of research tools, teaching strategies, and publication practices (see example here)

News from academia, information on research policy (see examples here and here)

Expert commentary on current (political, literary, scientific, etc.) events by field specialists (see examples here and here)

Discussions of current events, with opinions from your perspective as a researcher, when appropriate

Reviews of books and publications—and not just announcements of publications (see example here)

Blogs as workspaces

Blogs can be a place to develop your research as well as to publish it.

Some of our bloggers have turned their posts into traditional publications, including digital and hardcopy journals and books.

Here are some examples of blogs that have become publications:

Homosexus, published by Anne Verjus from 2008 to 2010, became a book titled Le bon mari. Une histoire politique des hommes et des femmes à l’époque révolutionnaire [Good husbands. A political history of men and women during the Revolution] (Fayard, 2010)

Les aspects concrets de la thèse [Concrete aspects of dissertations], published from 2008 to 2015 by a team of EHESS doctoral students as a way to document a seminar series on the concrete aspects of dissertations, was turned into a collaborative book titled Devenir chercheur. Écrire une thèse en sciences sociales (Éditions de l’EHESS, 2013) under the guidance of M. Hunsmann and S. Kapp

Technologies discursives [Discursive technology], launched in 2012 and still run by Marie-Anne Paveau, became L’analyse du discours numérique. Dictionnaire des formes et des pratiques [An analysis of digital discourse. A dictionary of forms and customs] (Hermann, 2017)

Blogs as forums

Focusing on readers when you write your blog posts can spark conversations. Research blogs are a type of Internet 2.0, a model that lets you converse with colleagues in your field and others and with the general public. But the potential for conversation afforded by the comments section becomes greater when you write for potential readers and when you share your writing with those around you (for instance, through email and social media). Blogs are first and foremost a place to share your writing, as evidenced by the concepts of “silent conversations” and reader loyalty in your visitor statistics. They can also be a source of surprises, attracting unexpected readers, as in the charming story of Meredith, an unexpected reader who became a researcher herself thanks to open online publications.

There are many examples of blogs that have successfully sparked animated discussion among readers, such as Espaces réflexifs, which published 125 posts in 2012 and generated 305 comments, or Sur un son rap by Karim Hammou, who created a dynamic map of Paris dance spots in the 1970s and 1980s and inspired readers to submit additional information. The readers eventually turned the comments section into a veritable discussion forum on their memories of dancers, DJs, and more.

– The Hypotheses Scientific Board

 

  1. See Alexandra Saemmer’s typology and the work of M.-A. Paveau.
  2. See this article by Elsa Poupadin and Mélodie Faury as well as this post.
  3. “A digital text is one that is written natively online whether on a website, a blog, social media, or in any digital space that hosts written publications.” – M.-A. Paveau.
Skip to content