I can’t even imaginge writing an academic text without any literature software. In particular, I am using Citavi which is also the reason why I am not changing to a Mac. The only reason!

It is especially helpful when changing citation styles – this is literally done by clicking a button. And since I am still getting the hang of Chicago Style, nevermind all the other ones, I am pretty thankful not to need to think about this. German citation styles differ as well, even between disciplines. In book studies, I got used to also including the publisher which you usually don’t do when writing German historiography, and which you once again do in English historiography. Honestly, it does make a difference if something is published by Random House and therefore aimed at a more general audience, or by an university press, therefore, I prefer to include the publisher.

Aside from citation styles and the automatic generation of the bibliography – even fancy ones which automatically separate sources from research literature -, the most important things in my literature software are all the many possibilities to sort titles.

[...]

Quelle: http://csarti.net/2019/08/love-letter-to-literature-software/

Die Nutzung von Computern und digitalen Methoden ist in der täglichen Praxis der Geisteswissenschaften fest verankert. Von der Erstellung einer Sammlung, über Bildanalysen, Text-Annotierung, bis hin zu Netzwerk-Analysen für die Ideengeschichte, keiner dieser Bereiche wird heutzutage noch ohne Computer angegangen.

Dies bringt Themen, die ursprünglich in der Software-Entwicklung angesiedelt waren, in den Fokus der Geistes- und Kulturwissenschaften. So stellt sich zum Beispiel die Frage nach der Nachhaltigkeit einer Software-Entwicklung für ein geisteswissenschaftliches Forschungsvorhaben oder welchen Best-Practice-Maßstäben dabei gefolgt werden sollte.

Ein wichtiger Faktor bei solchen Überlegungen ist die Möglichkeit, den Erfolg und die Nützlichkeit dieser digitalen Ansätze in den Geisteswissenschaften zu validieren.

Während der zweiten und dritten Förderphase von DARIAH-DE wurden verschiedene Ansätze zur Messung und Auswertung dieser Faktoren zusammengetragen und in eine übersichtliche Messanleitung gegossen, die Impactomatrix, zugänglich auf Github. So konnten Faktoren identifiziert werden, die den sogenannten Impact eines Werkzeuges oder eines Dienstes messen können, sowie Kriterien, mit deren Hilfe der Impact beeinflusst werden kann.

[...]

Quelle: https://dhd-blog.org/?p=12098

At the moment, I am re-writing the chapter presenting the case studies, including cutting most details needed for the German dissertation out of the upcoming monograph. I’ll try to roughly work parallel on the editing of the German publication and the re-writing of the English monograph, and I am now coming to the end of the Scandinavian case studies.

So, what brought me to include the Scandinavian kingdoms into my research? England and even Scotland were pretty clear, the English even have a reputation for being “king-slayers” – it’s a bit undeserved; usually they deposed their monarchs first, or more precise, forced them to abdicate – afterwards, they killed them, so it should be something like “ex-king-slayers”? But even the English with all their depositions from 1327 (Edward II) right through the Wars of the Roses and until Charles I and James II in the 17th century, do not hold a candle to the Swedish.
Very early on, it became clear that if I want to understand deposition, I have to include Sweden. If I counted correctly, from all the kings between ca. 1350 until 1600, only three were not deposed. Plus Margaret who ruled but was never crowned.

[...]

Quelle: http://csarti.net/2019/07/sweden-is-record-holder-for-deposing-monarchs/