When it comes to methodological rigour, many humanities disciplines are very similar to other fields of knowledge in various respects. At the same time, humanities disciplines have their own distinctive scholarly culture and practices, such as an orientation towards a wider audience than one of just academics or peers.
This means that humanities researchers often don’t get along very well with the systems and instruments that are frequently employed by other scientific fields to capture research quality and relevance, including the one-sided orientation towards publishing in English-language journals. In many domains, books, exhibitions and documentaries – including in languages other than English, targeting both colleagues and a wider audience – offer a better de facto measure of quality; this is often where pioneering research is presented. Indeed, many researchers see this as part of their role: if they were to limit themselves to the domain of peer-reviewed journals in English, they would sever their ties with a living culture and thus undermine the source that feeds them.
However, none of the above means that the quality of research results in the humanities cannot be tested in terms of scientific and social relevance or impact. As an assessment framework, the SEP 2021-2027 offers ample opportunities to do justice to the values of the researchers in the various humanities domains.
In order to make the most of the opportunities offered by the SEP, it is crucial that in the process of preparing the self-evaluation, research units select indicators that optimally reflect the quality and relevance of the research, taking the goal and strategy of the research unit as their starting point. Both the SEP document and this updated QRiH website list numerous potential indicators, supplemented with case studies and other examples. Finally, the profiles of the different research domains can be used as a reference point for positioning.