Authors: Maciej Maryl, Magdalena Wnuk
Reviewers: Karla Avanço, Françoise Gouzi

According to Joseph Schumpeter, innovation is more than just a buzzword—it’s the tangible realization of ideas that leads to fresh or enhanced products, services, and processes. But innovation isn’t a solitary endeavour. It begins with the creators themselves, who forge ahead with their vision. Only afterwards does it ripple outward, ultimately benefiting those who embrace the innovative vision. Yet, there are instances when promoting, disseminating, and assimilating innovation pose formidable challenges.

Journal of Digital History: a success story still in the making

One of the projects we analysed as a case study for OPERAS Innovation Lab was a technologically and intellectually challenging journal developed by a C2DH team at the University of Luxembourg. A group of digital humanists created the Journal of Digital History (JDH). They experimented with digital methods and wanted to share their research results without losing their technical and methodological layer. The goal of the journal was to create a space where researchers such as the creators could meet and discuss their methods.

The publishing methodology is the main innovative feature of the Journal. As an international peer-reviewed open access journal, JDH sets new standards in history publishing based on a novel multi-layered approach. From the beginning, submitted papers must contain the three layers that are characteristic of JDH: 

• a narration layer exploring the possibilities of multimedia storytelling;
• a hermeneutic layer highlighting the methodological implications of using digital tools, data, and code;
• a data layer providing access to data and making it reusable (when possible).

The difference between narrative and hermeneutic layers is quite challenging. Theoretically, the narrative layer will expose the results of the research and the hermeneutic layer will include the methods, reflexive comments and the code created. In practice, differentiating between the two layers is always more difficult than it seems, especially for articles that are centered on a strong methodological thinking. Despite this complexity, however, JDH authors need to distinguish between the layers to be able to submit the paper. Moreover, on the technical side, the texts need to be submitted using a Jupyter Notebook software, which, as the creators mention, is one of the biggest difficulties since not all authors eligible to propose a paper are familiar with this application and its tool. 

Apart from the digital version created as a Jupyter notebook, the articles are published also in the PDF format. One of the purposes of this output is to make it easier for authors to deposit their work at their institutional repositories and submit it in a research assessment process. 

Innovative journals: challenges on the way

The Journal of Digital History started as a peer-reviewed journal in 2019 and released its first issue in Autumn 2021. At the moment, the team consists of developers, a graphic designer, and editors. Recently, JDH has paired with DeGruyter (as of lately DeGruyter – Brill) publishing house in order to distribute the PDF versions of the papers more easily using the publishers’ brand and its technological capacity.

JDH is maintained by the university infrastructure which means that the editorial board has a pretty stable work environment. However, it faces the challenge of educating its authors and finding experts to review the content. Similarly to DARIAH Overlay Journal “Transformations” presented on the Observatory in March (read the post here), JDH needs to reach potential authors and potential reviewers and build its own community. For innovative lesser known or yet unrecognised journals it is not an easy task. 

The success of timely and regular releases depends on researchers’ openness to new editorial workflows and recognition of their work through various national and institutional evaluation mechanisms. The second is one of the reasons why JDH collaborates with DeGruyter and converts papers to PDFs. 

Crafting a JDH issue involves intricate steps, often hindered by the scarcity of experts who can review content across both disciplinary and technological boundaries. Consequently, the process typically extends to approximately one year, sometimes more. 

The delicate balance of finding competent reviewers while ensuring a rigorous double-blind review further complicates matters. In light of this, the editorial board has proactively adjusted their approach: beginning with the upcoming issue, JDH will transition to a single-blind review model. These adaptations underscore the journal’s dedication to continuous improvement.

Innovative journals: what do they need to truly change the patterns of scholarly communication?

The OPERAS Lab case study reveals the complex landscape faced by creators of innovative projects. Fortunately, strategic external communication and networking hold promise for long-term solutions. As the research community engages with cutting-edge journals – whether through JDH’s three-layer approach or “Transformations” backed up by open repositories preprints – their preparedness for intellectual exercises grows.  

The OPERAS Lab case study (a full summary of its results as well as report on the case study coming soon) showed networking and visibility as one of the categories that shape difficulties and challenges of innovations in scholarly communication. 

Creators struggle not only with the development and sustainability of their projects but also with effectively informing about them. OPERAS Lab workshop in Zadar provided valuable insights into addressing the challenges faced by scholarly communication in SSH.

The discussions centered around practical solutions, and several promising ideas emerged. First, fostering an informal community of innovative editors and journal managers could facilitate knowledge exchange and collaboration. 

Second, increasing face-to-face and onsite presentations with a clear message about the benefits of SSH research would engage potential recipients. 

Lastly, leveraging existing channels within infrastructures and consortia can amplify the impact of these efforts. By implementing these strategies, we can collectively enhance scholarly communication and promote the dissemination of innovative SSH outputs.