Sozialwissenschaften
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (13)
- Article (8)
- Conference Proceeding (4)
- Preprint (1)
- Report (1)
- Review (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (28)
Keywords
- Datenschutz (5)
- Recht (5)
- Forschungsdaten (4)
- Präsidentenwahl (4)
- USA (4)
- Deutsche (3)
- Digital Humanities (3)
- Isolationismus (3)
- Personenbezogene Daten (3)
- Deutschland. Deutscher Bundestag (2)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (16)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (7)
- Postprint (4)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (11)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (8)
- (Verlags-)Lektorat (1)
Publisher
Dieses Gespräch wurde am 6. Februar 2023 in den Räumlichkeiten des Marsilius-Kollegs der Universität Heidelberg aufgenommen. Es spiegelt den Austausch zwischen den beteiligten Wissenschaftlerinnen und Wissenschaftlern wider und gibt einen ersten Einblick in die Themen und Fragen, die in diesem Sammelband eine Rolle spielen. Das Gespräch wurde transkribiert und an denjenigen Stellen sprachlich überarbeitet, die es aus Gründen der Verständlich- und Lesbarkeit erforderten. Der mündliche, im Nachdenken begriffene Charakter des Gesprächs wurde gewahrt.
KonsortSWD ist das NFDI Konsortium für die Sozial-, Verhaltens-, Bildungs- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften. Für die äußerst vielfältigen Datentypen und Forschungsmethoden bauen die Beteiligten im Rahmen der NFDI eine bereits bestehende Forschungsdateninfrastruktur aus und ergänzen neue integrierende Dienste. Basis sind die heute 41 vom Rat für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsdaten akkreditierten Forschungsdatenzentren (FDZ). FDZ sind Spezialsammlungen zu jeweils spezifischen Forschungsdaten, z.B. aus der qualitativen Sozialforschung, und können so Forschende auf Basis einer ausführlichen Expertise zu diesen Daten beraten. Neben der Unterstützung der FDZ baut KonsortSWD auch neue Dienste in den Bereichen Datenproduktion, Datenzugang und Technische Lösungen auf.
We question the growing consensus in the literature that European Americans behave as a homogenous pan-ethnic coalition of voters. Seemingly below the radar of scholarship on voting groups in American politics, we identify a group of white voters that behaves differently from others: German Americans, the largest ethnic group, regionally concentrated in the ‘Swinging Midwest’. Using county level voting returns, ancestry group information from the American Community Survey (ACS), current survey data and historical census data going back as early as 1910, we provide evidence for a partisan and a non-partisan pathway that motivated German Americans to vote for Trump in 2016: a historically grown association with the Republican Party and an acquired taste for isolationist attitudes that mobilizes non-partisan German Americans to support isolationist candidates. Our findings indicate that European American experiences of migration and integration still echo into the political arena of today.
Hosting Providers play an essential role in the development of Internet services such as e-Research Infrastructures. In order to promote the development of such services, legislators on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean introduced “safe harbour” provisions to protect Service Providers (a category which includes Hosting Providers) from legal claims (e.g. of copyright infringement). Relevant provisions can be found in § 512 of the United States Copyright Act and in art. 14 of the Directive 2000/31/EC (and its national implementations). The cornerstone of this framework is the passive role of the Hosting Provider through which he has no knowledge of the content that he hosts. With the arrival of Web 2.0, however, the role of Hosting Providers on the Internet changed; this change has been reflected in court decisions that have reached varying conclusions in the last few years. The purpose of this article is to present the existing framework (including recent case law from the US, Germany and France).
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) on personal data protection in the European Union entered into application on 25 May 2018. With its 173 recitals and 99 articles, it may be one of the most ambitious pieces of EU legislation to date. Rather than a guide to GDPR compliance for Digital Humanities researchers, this chapter looks at the use of personal data in DH projects from the data subject’s perspective, and examines to what extent the GDPR kept its promise of enabling the data subject to “take control of his data”. The chapter provides an overview of the right to privacy and the right to data protection, a discussion of the relation between the concept of data control and privacy and data protection law, an introduction to the GDPR, and an explanation of its relevance for scientific research in general and DH in particular. The main section of the chapter analyses two types of data control mechanisms (consent and data subject rights) and their impact on DH research.