Natalia Bragina, Jelena Jermolajeva


This article points out the problem of incompatibility of certain types of humanities research with the standard requirements to scientific paper, which have been developed in recent decades. In humanities studies, the process of reflection and development of a thought is often the main content of scientific work; however in the current standard this aspect is almost ignored. The standard set of requirements imposed upon papers by most scientific journals makes it difficult to obtain the full scientific status for those humanities works that are based on innovative conceptual approach and introduce new perspectives. The aim of this paper is to show the failure of the audit approach to humanities research and substantiate the necessity of extending the current format of a journal article giving it greater freedom and flexibility. In the paper the following methods are used: analysis of relevant literature, method of rationale, historical method, and comparative analysis. The proposed relaxation of the standard requirements to scientific article may stimulate humanities studies that have ground-breaking innovation but do not fit into the standard format. Moreover, it will contribute to the development of conceptual thinking of students of higher school humanities programs, which will create opportunities for more intensive development of the humanities.


audit approach; humanities research; standard requirements for a scientific paper

Full Text:



Cronin, B., Shaw, D., & and La Barre, K. (2003) A cast of thousands: coauthorship and subauthorship collaboration in the 20th century as manifested in the scholarly journal literature of psychology and philosophy, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54 (9), 855-871.

Drakeman, D. (2016). Why We Need the Humanities: Life Science, Law and the Common Good. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Fisher, D., Rubenson, K., Rockwell, K., Atkinson-Grosjean, J., & Grosjean, G. (2000). Performance Indicators and the Humanities and Social Sciences. Vancouver, BC: Centre for Policy Studies in Higher Education and Training, University of British Columbia.

Furlong, J., & Oancea, A. (Eds.) (2007). Assessing Quality in Applied and Practice-Based Research in Education: Continuing the Debate. London: Routledge.

Guetzkow, J. Lamont, M., & Mallard, G. (2004). What is originality in the humanities and the social sciences? American Sociological Review, 69 (2), 190-212.

Heikkilä, T., & Niiniluoto, I. (2017). The value and role of humanities research: Review of the contemporary status and suggestions for future. Nordicom Information, 39 (1), 80-86.

Hellqvist, B. (2010). Referencing in the humanities and its implications for citation analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(2), 310-318.

Hemlin, S. (1993). Scientific quality in the eyes of the scientist: a questionnaire study. Scientometrics, 27 (1), 3-18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017752

Holm, P., Jarrick, A., & Scott, D. (2015). Humanities World Report 2015. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

McIntyre, M.E. (2000) Audit, Education, and Goodhart's Law: Or, taking rigidity seriously. Retrieved from: http://www.atm.damtp.cam.ac.uk/mcintyre/papers/LHCE/dilnot-analysis.html .

Nietzsche, F. (2008). Der Antichrist: Fluch auf das Christentum. Koeln: Anaconda.

Ochsner, M., Hug, S.E., & Daniel, H.-D. (2013). Four Types of Research in the Humanities: Setting the Stage for Research Quality Criteria. Research Evaluation, 22 (2), 79–92. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs039.

Rickert, H. (2013). Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft. Berlin: Celtis Verlag.

Rinehart, R.E. (2016). Neoliberalism, Audit Culture, and Teachers: Empowering Goal Setting within Audit Culture. Teachers and Curriculum, 16 (1), 29-35.

Schweizerische Akademie der Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften (2016). It’s the Humanities, Stupid! Retrieved from https://abouthumanities.sagw.ch .

Пушкин А.С. (1962). Собрание сочинений в 10т. Т.6. Москва: Гос. изд-во худ. лит-ры.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17770/sie2019vol1.3879


  • There are currently no refbacks.