The QRiH domain profiles were produced as an aid to writing the self-evaluation. Research units can use the profiles to refine their own position and strategy, against the background of what is more or less common in specific domains when it comes to products, communication channels and audiences.
For this reason, the profiles describe the culture of various domains of humanities research. After all, the differences between these domains – and even within them – are considerable, although there are also many similarities. In that respect, these profiles can also help when determining the position of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research groups.
The profiles were developed in consultation with the boards of the national research schools or – when these were lacking – specialists in the field. They build on empirical research, annual reports and other relevant documents. Use was also made of the NWO’s December 2016 research study on publication cultures in the humanities, which will be updated in 2023.
The profiles are based on the following structure:
Domain
- Is there a prevailing disciplinary orientation within the domain, or is it a multidisciplinary domain?
- Are there links with other domains in the humanities?
Audiences
- Whom do the outcomes of research target? Which audiences are relevant in this domain, ranging from fellow researchers to professionals, policymakers or a socially engaged general public?
- Are these audiences primarily or predominantly international or national?
Products and communication
- What are the distinctive products (books, articles, databases, etc.)?
- Are there differences in the effort required to produce such products?
- In which languages is research published?
- How important is publishing in Dutch?
- Which review processes are relevant?
Processes and strategies
- For whom is research produced and with whom do collaborations take place, and what implications does this have for the efforts made?
- Are there ‘single authored’ publications/products or is there co-authorship?
Domain-specific aspects of quality and relevance
- What are the characteristic outcomes of research that are specifically relevant to this domain?
- Which SEP indicators in particular lend themselves to collecting robust data to support the narrative of the self-evaluation?
- To what extent are quantitative indicators of use and recognition useful, such as citation analyses and other bibliometric indicators?