Interfacing Collaborative and Multiple-Layered Spaces of Interpretation in Humanities Research. The Case of Semantically-Enhanced Objective Hermeneutics ChristophSchindlerschindler@dipf.deGermanInstituteforInternationalEducationalResearchGermanyCorneliaVejaveja@dipf.deGermanInstituteforInternationalEducationalResearchGermanyHelgeKminekkminek@em.uni-frankfurt.deGoetheUniversityFrankfurt,Germany

Introduction Inrecentyears,semanticallyenhancedDigitalHu-

manitiesResearchhasbecomeawidespreadtopicre-alizedindifferentenvironments(e.g.CWRC,Pundit).Whilesemanticgraphtechnologiesaremainlyusedtoconnect, annotate, query and aggregate strictly for-malized entities, there is a lack of interfaces for en-hancingactsofinterpretations.

Annotationsaredescribedascrucialininterpreta-tionsandaredesignatedasakillerapplication(Juola,2009),scholarlyprimitive(Unsworth,2000)andcon-sidered as notetaking within main scholarly infor-mationactivities(Palmer,etal.2009).Concerninganinterpretational act, limitations of annotations areidentified(overlapping,flexibility),andthereisade-mandforcustomizationtotheresearchcontextandaniterative and agile of schema development (Piez,2010).Druckerindicatestheemergentqualitiesofin-terpretation, while suggesting an interface which“supportsactsofinterpretationratherthansimplyre-turningselectedresults fromapre-existingdataset”(Drucker,2013:37).Inthispaper,thisdesideratumisaddressedbydesigninganinterfaceforcollaborativeandmulti-layeredspacesofinterpretationsbasedona

semantic graph (Suchman, 2007; Drucker, 2011;Rheinberger,2010;Barad,2003).

Aspecificstyleofinterpretationischosenasacasestudy, i.e. collaborativeanalysisof face-to-facesitua-tions in small groups by creating amultiple layeredspace of interpretation - Objective Hermeneutics. InGerman-speakingcountries,theapproachofObjectiveHermeneuticsisoneofthemainmethodologiesusedforqualitativeanalysis(Flick,2005),whichgeneratesdeep-structureanalysesofcasesbyreconstructingac-tionsandmeanings.Creationofaninterfacethatena-blessemanticannotationsfortheseactsofinterpreta-tionsmakes it possible to elaborate and explicate amultiplelayeredspaceofinterpretation.

Inthefollowing,wedescribesettingsintheinter-pretational act of Objective Hermeneutics. Further-more,thebackgroundofthedesignisoutlinedinrela-tiontomethods,designanddata.Themaincontributionistwofold:(i)realizationofaninterfacefocusingthese-manticenhancementofthecollaborativespacesofinter-pretation and accountability and (ii) examines the se-mantic explication of the research data (interactionalprotocols), the interlinkedmultiple layeredannotationsandthepossibilitytoretracethespaceofinterpretation.

The collaborative interpretational act of Objective Hermeneutics

ThetheoreticalframeworkofObjectiveHermeneu-ticsisbasedonOervermann'stheoryofprofessionali-zation(seeReichertz,2004),wherebytheactofinter-pretationfollowsstrictprinciplesforanalyzing‘natu-ralprotocols’ofsocialpractices(transcripts).Inase-quential multi-step procedure of interpretation, thestructureofthecaseisreconstructed.Theactofinter-pretationisrealizedinsmallgroupswhereacommonspace of imagination is created collaboratively,wherein multiple layers of interpretations interfereand make use of falsification and abduction (Flick,2005).Accordingly,theprocessof interpretationcanbeoutlinedasfollows:1)Specifyingresearchquestionand analytical framework; 2) choosing appropriatetranscript;3)selectingsequencefrominteractionpro-tocol (transcript);4)creatinganddiscussingstepbystepmultiplecorrespondingstories,perspectives,andconnectionsofthesequence;5)recontextualisationtotheconcretecase,wherebyinthelongrunhypothesesofthestructureofthecasearecreatediterativelyandnewsequencesareselected(backto3.).Additionally,6)aproofingprocess is started (falsification).Basedonthisinterpretativeact,adetailedcasestructureiscreated which describes the conflictingmotivations,interestsandinteractionsoftheactors.Whileinrecent

years special researchdata archives forarchiving andre-usingthetranscripts(non-processablePDFs)havebeenestablished,theactofinterpretationitselfisstillpaper-based.Thissituationprovidestheopportunityforanappropriatecasestudy fordesigningan inter-face forcollaborativeandmulti-layeredspacesof in-terpretations (forexample, see thearchive forpeda-gogical casuistry (ApaeK) archiving transcripts ofclassroominteractions)

Methods, design, and data The research environment for Objective Herme-

neuticsisbasedonaparticipatorydesignandagilede-velopment approach, using Semantic MediaWikiframework.Tofulfillthecase-relatedspecialresearchrequirements an extension for Semantic MediaWikiand a research ontologywere collaboratively devel-oped.Besidestheanalysisofneedsandrequirements(site visit, artefact analysis) rapid prototyping wasusedandthreeversionsoftheenvironmentwerethor-oughlytested(thelogfileanalysisbetweenthelasttwoversionsindicatesaclearimprovementattheinterpreta-tionprocessbyreducingthebreakupratefrom33%to0%.) A group of distributed researchers across Ger-manyandinterestedinclassroominteractions(topicothering)usedtheenvironmentinpracticeoversev-eralmonthsandsupportedthedesignprocessbyat-tendingmeetingsandgivingfeedback.

Interfacing collaborative spaces of interpretations and accountability

Explicating interaction protocols semantically TheactofinterpretationinObjectiveHermeneutics

isbasedon‘naturalprotocols’ofsocialpractice,whichpursuestrictnotationguidelinesforthetranscriptionprocess(e.g.anonymization,settingsofactors,prop-erties like loudness).The transcript isenrichedwithcontextualmetadata(e.g.collectingcontext,duration,andtopic).Linebyline,eachspeechactofanactorandrelevantinteractionsaredescribedindetail(basedonaudio recordings, maps, photographs). This initialbase already allows for semantically enhancing thespace of interpretation: Interlinking relevant docu-ments,entities,properties,andrelationsforsemanticbrowsing(Figure1,1+2).Additionally,a formulase-mantically(Figure1,3+4)outlinestheinteractionsofthetranscriptindetail(actor,speechact/interaction,linenumber).Thus,eachannotationofinterpretationcanberelatedtothisempiricallevelandtheprocess

ofinterpretationcanberetraced.Basedonthisseman-tically enhanced transcript, the researchers chooseanddefinetheirsequenceofinteresttostarttheiractofinterpretation(segmentselection).

Figure 1. Metadata of transcript (1, 2) and semantic

interactions (3, 4)

Interlinking spaces of interpretation and multiple layered annotations TheactofinterpretationinObjectiveHermeneutics

issemantically-enhancedandexplicatedbyfollowingguidelinesforinterpretation,wherebytheflexibilityofinterpretation and the computer-mediated co-pres-enceistakenintoaccount.Eachselectedsequenceofthe transcript opens up the space of interpretationthroughmultiplelayeredstylesofannotations(stories,perspectives, connections, and contextualization)(Figure2,2+3).Subjecttotheirdiscussionsandnotes,theresearchersspecifytheirargumentsandelaboratea common ground for the case analysis. For an ade-quate interface of the phenomenon, themultiple lay-eredstylesofannotationsneedtobevisualizedinrela-tion to the corresponding sequenceof the transcript(compareFigure2,1+3).Closurerespectivelydensifi-cationofthespaceofinterpretationissemanticallyen-hanced by creating specific case hypotheses. Re-searcherscreateconnectionsbetweenthelayeredan-notationsandspecificcasehypotheses,wherebyahy-pothesisanditsrelatedentities(e.g. layerofannota-tion, sequence, interaction, actor, or author) can bebrowsedsemantically,describedwith textsanddatarepresentations. Each annotation is described withfurther relevant properties (e.g. timestamp, re-searcher name, related sequence) and interlinkedwithinthesematicgraph.

Figure 2. Selected sequences (1), annotation creation (2),

and multiple layered annotations and discussions (3)

Retracing the spaces of interpretation and accountability Theanalysisandreflectionoftheresearchprocess

aswellasthespacesofinterpretationareenhancedbyusingasemanticgraphandexplicatingtheinteractionprotocols(transcripts)offeringnewcapacitiesforre-tracing the spaces of interpretations (Figure 3). Themultiplelayeredsemanticgraphinterlinkstheactsofinterpretationandfacilitatesmultipleperspectivesforaccountabilityconcerningthe1)interactionprotocolsandtheirinterlinking(Figure4,2),2)thechronologi-calactsoftheresearchers,3)themultiplelayeredan-notationsforinterpretations(Figure4,1),and4)thecreation and interlinking of the case hypothesis. Be-sidestheseimminentpossibilitiesoftheresearchpro-ject, external aspects of accountability can be ad-dressed.WhileinHumanitiesthepracticeofdatacita-tions is notwidely spread, research communities inObjectHermeneuticshaveestablishedacitationprac-ticeviathearchivesofthetranscripts,referringtotheinteractionsofthetranscriptintheirpublications(asbibliographic data). In retracing the spaces of inter-pretation,therelevantmultiplelayersofannotationsas well as the hypothesis interlinking can be refer-enced,opened,anddescribedwithsemanticvocabu-laries.Thesemanticgraphhasbeenmappedtorele-vantsemanticvocabulariese.g.Wf4EverResearchOb-ject Model (ro), Object Reuse and Exchange (ore),NamedGraphs(rdfg),WebAnnotationDataModel.

Figure 3. Visualization of semantic graph with traceable

entities

Figure 4. Annotation layer of stories (1) and interactive

datatable of interactions (2)

Discussion and outlook Inthispaper,wediscussedanddemonstratedthe

designofaninterfaceforcollaborativeandmulti-lay-eredspacesofinterpretation,usingthemethodologi-cal approach of ‘Objective Hermeneutics’ as a casestudy. The interface is considered in relation to thephenomenon and the relevantperformativematerial-discursivecapacitiesfortheinterpretationalact,focus-ing on the use of a semantic graph. Thedetailed se-manticdescriptionof theresearchdata (transcripts)andtheassociatedspacesof interpretations(stories,perspectives, connections, and contextualisationsalongwithhypothesis)enableacollaborativeanddis-tributedanalysisandnewwaysofretracingthespacesofinterpretation(interlinkeddata,chronologicalacts,multiple layered annotations, case hypothesis). Buttimeandeffortofthesemanticenhancementneedtobebalancedagainsttheseaddedvaluesineachnewre-search project (e.g. interlinking, accountability, datamanipulation,visualisation,citation,andopenness).

Acknowledgements

WewouldliketothanktheresearchgroupsinOb-jectiv Hermeneutics and Semantic CorA, especiallyMarcRittberger,MichaelMeierandSaschaKabel.Ini-tially,therealizationoftheresearchenvironmentSe-manticCorAwassupportedbytheGermanResearchFoundation(DFG);itsfurtherdevelopmentforObjec-tive Hermeneutics was funded in the context of theeHumanitiesCenterCEDIFORbytheGermanFederalMinistry of Education and Research (BMBF) no.01UG1416C.

Bibliography

Barad,K. (2003). “Posthumanistperformativity:To-ward an understanding of how matter comes tomatter.”Signs,28(3),801–831.

Drucker, J. (2013). “Performative Materiality and

Theoretical Approaches to Interface.” digital hu-manities quarterly. 7 (1). http://www.digitalhu-manities.org/dhq/vol/7/1/000143/000143.html

Drucker,J.(2011).“Humanitiesapproachestointer-

facetheory.”CultureMachine.12(0).1-20.Flick,U.(2005).“QualitativeResearchinSociologyin

GermanyandtheUS—StateoftheArt,Differencesand Developments.” Forum Qualitative Sozi-alforschung/Forum:QualitativeSocialResearch,6(3). http://www.qualitative-research.net/in-dex.php/fqs/article/view/17

Juola,P.(2008).“KillerApplicationsinDigitalHuman-

ities.” Literary and Linguistic Computing, 23(1),73–83.https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqm042

Palmer,C.L.,Teffeau,L.C.,Pirmann,C.M.(2009).

“Scholarlyinformationpracticesintheonlineenvi-ronment.” Report commissioned by OCLC Re-search. http://www.oclc. org/programs/publica-tions/reports/2009-02.pdf.

Piez,W. (2010). “Towards hermeneuticmarkup: an

architectural outline.” Digital Humanities 2010:Conference Abstracts.http://dh2010.cch.kcl.ac.uk/academic-pro-gramme/abstracts/papers/pdf/ab-743.pdf

Reichertz, J. (2004). “Objective Hermeneutics and

HermeneuticSociologyofKnowledge.”U.Flick,E.v.Kardoff,I.Steinke(eds.),ACompaniontoQuali-tativeResearch.290-295.London.

Rheinberger, H.-J. (2010). An epistemology of the

concrete:Twentieth-centuryhistoriesoflife.DukeUniversityPress.

Suchman, L. (2007). “Human-machine reconfigura-

tions:Plansandsituatedactions.”Cambridge,Uni-versityPress.

Unsworth, J. (2000). “Scholarly primitives: What

methodsdohumanities researchershave in com-mon,andhowmightourtoolsreflectthis.”Sympo-siumonHumanitiesComputing:FormalMethods,ExperimentalPractice.King’sCollege,London.