Abstract:Scholars in the humanities rely on carefully-constructed prose to convey ideas, while many in the sciences deploy numerical precision instead. Although university administrators often tout multi- or inter-discipinarity, it is unclear whether there is a deep understanding of how these modes of investigation are different, and how those differences might be accommodated and supported. For example, the disciplines that use numbers as a chief mode of expression were from the beginning conceived, embodied with and configured for external assessment as part of their claims to authority. As a consequence, their metrics were not designed to assess other kinds of scholarship such as that of the arts and the humanities. And, read in the opposite direction, the fact that the humanities were never customised for those numerical-based controls should not be understood as a failing of the discipline, but as an integral dimension of its distinct practice. This contribution offers a study of documentary form in the academy. The discussion will examine how scholarship in different fields came to have different formal features. It will furthermore consider what the implications of these differences are for how the disciplines are now seen and assessed. By looking to the history and traditions of different forms of scholarship, this chapter seeks to offer insight into the current debates about how productivity and impact are to be defined, marked and assessed in the academy. This chapter introduces the possibility that humanistic research might be expressed in word or wood and investigates the consequences of such a provocation. It concerns itself with select dimensions of scholarly publication that are especially apparent from a perspective across wood and word-among them, peer review, assessment, dissemination, citation and ownership. Under the intensifying exigencies of documentation, components of the written document that were once provisional become obligatory and codified through practice. The foregoing discussion of a historically informed experiment in academic publishing raises for consideration how specific practices of knowledge have been legitimised over time. The moments of friction encountered by the Cabinet, Box and Article provide clues about how certain forms of knowledge gain traction over time. Conceiving publications as unique performances of meaning may stimulate alternative strategies of assessment, interpretation and dissemination that are cognisant of—and work in concert with—the diverse forms at issue.

Scholarly mathematical communication at a crossroads

In Accordance with a “More Majestic Order”: The New Math and the Nature of Mathematics at Midcentury

Selections Reprinted from Mathematical Reviews

arXiv and the Symbiosis of Physics Preprints and Journal Review Articles

Quantum Game Theory and Open Access Publishing

On arXiv moderation system

On the share of mathematics published by Elsevier and Springer

The Changing Landscape of Scholarly Publishing (in Finance) – An Author’s view

“Reproducible” Research in Mathematical Sciences Requires Changes in our Peer Review Culture and Modernization of our Current Publication Approach

Scholarly Communication and the Continuum of Electronic Publishing

In praise of the referee

Preprints as accelerator of scholarly communication: An empirical analysis in Mathematics

In wood and word, or, a gloss on documents and documentation in the humanities

Beyond Journals and Peer Review: Towards a More Flexible Ecosystem for Scholarly Communication

Sustainable computational science: the ReScience initiative

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review

Digital Transformation of Academic Publishing: A Call for the Decentralization and Democratization of Academic Journals

Citations versus expert opinions: citation analysis of featured reviews of the American Mathematical Society

Contributing to global literature on theory, practice, and methods

Mathematical practice, crowdsourcing, and social machines

Game theory and scholarly publishing: premises for an agreement around open access