Author: Maciej Maryl
“Everything becomes structurally more complex, to become functionally simpler,” wrote the philosopher Vilém Flusser in his visionary work questioning the very future of writing. Thus, he saw a world where new technologies – more complex and faster “quills” – would functionally revolutionise how we inscribe thought, moving us beyond the linear constraints of the printed page. Such considerations are more relevant than ever as we navigate the digital transition in scholarly communication.
Here, at the OPERAS Innovation Lab we’ve been delving into these very questions. We explored current writing practices in SSH to inform future OPERAS activities on researchers’ needs regarding publishing technologies, and both ongoing and upcoming transformations of scholarly communication. Our latest article reports on a part of a larger study conducted in the framework of the H2020 OPERAS-P project, which explores this evolving landscape. We interviewed 33 researchers, librarians and digital humanists from across the field of social sciences and humanities to understand what innovation in academic writing truly means today.
Three Key Understandings of Innovation
We distilled the notion of innovation in scholarly writing based on semi-structured interviews exploring experiences and perspectives of individuals involved in various aspects of scholarly communication. Through the analysis, we defined three key aspects of innovation in scholarly communication:
- Format: This goes beyond simply putting a PDF online. It points to the creation of new, dynamic, and interactive forms of scholarly output that are native to the digital environment.
- Access: This highlights the move towards open access, ensuring that research is not locked behind paywalls but is readily available to a global audience, fostering a more equitable and collaborative research landscape.
- Audience: This involves a shift in how we think about the recipients of our research. It encourages us to engage with diverse audiences, both within and beyond academia, using new channels like blogs and social media to spark wider conversations.
A Tale of Two Worlds
Despite the excitement around these new possibilities, our findings reveal a palpable tension. Many scholars, whilst working in a digital environment, still adhere to models conceived for print. This creates a disconnect between the potential of digital-native formats and the persistence of traditional forms like the monograph.
The study highlights the need to move beyond merely replicating the printed page on a screen. The future lies in creating dynamic, interactive, and evolving texts that fully exploit the potential of the digital medium.
Barriers to Progress
Whilst there’s a clear appetite for change, significant challenges remain. The academic reward system, which often favours traditional publications, can be a powerful disincentive. Furthermore, a lack of skills, infrastructure, and standardised citation practices for new scholarly forms are hurdles we must collectively overcome.
A Period of Transition
Our research suggests that we are in a period of transition not unlike the dawn of the printing press, where established and emerging forms of scholarly communication coexist and influence one another. This article offers a glimpse into this evolving world, based on the first phase of our research. This is a critical moment for the academic community. The choices we make now will shape the future of how we create, share, and engage with knowledge.
We’ve only scratched the surface here. To get the full picture and explore the rich details of our findings, we encourage you to read the complete article, open access obviously:
Maryl, Maciej. „Faster and Faster Quills: Innovation in Scholarly Writing”. Teksty Drugie 2 (2023): 156–79. https://doi.org/10.18318/td.2023.en.2.11.
In case the article only partly satisfies your curiosity, delve into the full report:
Maciej, Maryl et. al. OPERAS-P Deliverable D6.5: Report on the Future of Scholarly Writing in SSH. 2021. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4922511.