Notes on Academic Work

Working Group Modern History and Historical Migration Research
Prof. Dr. Christoph A. Rass
[IMIS] [SFB1604] [HistOS]

1. basic principles of scientific work

The four pillars of good research practice (DFG standards)

Honesty

  • Strict transparency with regard to own and third-party contributions
  • Correct and complete acknowledgement of third-party intellectual property
  • Disclosure of methods and results

Diligence

  • Work according to recognized rules of historical science(lege artis)
  • Thorough source criticism and methodological rigor
  • Precise documentation of the research process

Documentation

  • Comprehensible recording of all research steps
  • Complete source citations and references
  • Archiving of research data according to FAIR principles

Critical self-reflection

  • Systematic questioning of own findings
  • Awareness of one's own location
  • Openness to alternative interpretations

2. special features of historical science

Objectivity and subjectivity

History is always a construction from the perspective of the present:

  • Past events are not directly observable
  • Historians interpret and narrate, not just collect facts
  • "Disciplined imagination" is required - creative interpretation on an empirical basis
  • Subjectivity is "objectified" through methodological rigor and transparency

Narrativity in the writing of history

  • History is presented in the form of narratives (historical narratives)
  • Difference to fictional narration: Claim to verifiable reconstruction
  • Narratives combine isolated facts into meaningful sequences of events
  • They explain how historical developments have taken place

3. methodological standards (modern history)

Source criticism - the heart of historical research

External source criticism
  • Material and form: Method of production, choice of material, physical characteristics
  • Transmission: How did the source come to us?
  • Completeness: Is the source completely preserved?
  • Authenticity: Is the stated author correct?
Internal source criticism
  • Proximity to the event: Temporal and geographical distance
  • Author's knowledge: What could the author have known about the events?
  • Intention: What did the author want to report? What were his intentions?
  • Tendencies: What colorations can be expected based on the perspective?
Digital source criticism (new challenge)
  • Volatility: Digital sources can easily be changed or deleted
  • Metadata: Technical information about creation and editing
  • Manipulability: Increased risk of forgery
  • Long-term archiving: How can permanent availability be ensured?

Specific methods of modern history (examples)

Oral history and interviews with contemporary witnesses

Standards:

  • Enable free narration by contemporary witnesses
  • Audio/video recording with subsequent transcription
  • Thorough preparation of the interview
  • Post-processing to clarify contradictions

Challenges:

  • Contemporary witnesses tell personal perspectives, not "objective history"
  • Statements must be treated critically (like autobiographies)
  • Interpretation is the sole responsibility of the researchers
  • Transparency towards the contemporary witnesses about the intended use
Digital history
  • Integration of classic historical questions with informatic methods
  • Digitization and curation of historical sources
  • Text and data mining for large amounts of data
  • Visualization of research results
  • Semantic web technologies

4. ethical standards and data protection

Dealing with sensitive sources

Special caution with:

  • Personal tragedies or traumatic experiences
  • Health conditions of persons who are still alive
  • Information that could lead to re-traumatization

Principles:

  • Weighing up public interest and personal rights
  • Avoid unnecessary details on sensitive topics
  • Obtain informed consent from respondents

Data protection (GDPR-compliant)

  • Consent: Conscious and informed consent required
  • Anonymization: Protect names and identifying details in publications
  • Personal rights: Do not disseminate data worthy of protection
  • Archive material: Respect personal rights even for interviews that have already been archived

5. avoidance of scientific misconduct

Main forms of scientific misconduct

Plagiarism
  • Full plagiarism: Complete copying of other people's work
  • Partial plagiarism: Adoption of individual sections without identification
  • Translation plagiarism: Passing off translated texts as your own
  • Copy-paste plagiarism: copying student work
Self-plagiarism (text recycling)
  • Reuse of own texts without labeling
  • Pretending to be new/original
  • Only permitted if: Recognizable added value and agreement with the supervisor
Data falsification
  • Invention of data or results
  • Manipulation of sources or representations
  • Concealment of contradictory findings

Correct citation

Basic rule

As soon as information, thoughts, quotations or formulations are used that do not originate from the author, the author must be cited.

Direct quotations
  • Quotation marks must be used verbatim
  • Mark errors in the original with "[sic]"
  • Exact page reference required
Indirect quotations
  • Summary in own words
  • Mark with "cf." or "see"
  • Page reference required
Proof of own preliminary work
  • When reusing own texts: reference to earlier publication
  • Condition: New information or recognizable added value
  • Consultation with supervisor recommended

6. practical tips

Topic selection and research design

Criteria for the choice of topic:

  • Relevance: Scientifically significant and interesting
  • Feasibility: Check availability of sources
  • Personal interest: Motivation for intensive study
  • Timeframe: Realistic for available time

Research question:

  • Precise and coherent formulation
  • Guides the entire research program
  • Consideration of the availability of sources

Research and literature management

Recommended tools:

  • Citavi or similar literature management software
  • Careful and systematic documentation and evaluation from the outset
  • Direct storage of source references
  • Complete documentation of references to research literature

Quality criteria:

  • Check the quality of publications
  • Give preference to peer-reviewed publications
  • Pay attention to scientific standards

Structure of scientific papers

Introduction (approx. 10% of the total length)
  • Explain the relevance of the topic
  • Formulate the research question clearly
  • Describe methodological approach
  • Theoretical foundation
  • State of research
  • Sources
  • Outline the structure of the work

Main part

  • Detailed presentation
  • Analysis and interpretation
  • Consider divergent research opinions
  • Addressing controversies
  • Critically evaluate sources

Conclusion (approx. 10% of the total volume)

  • Summarize findings
  • Outlook for further research
  • Do not introduceany new arguments

Formalities

  • Complete footnotes for all references
  • Precise headings
  • Grammatically correct language
  • Subjunctive in indirect speech

Linguistic design

Scientific style:

  • Complete, grammatically correct sentences
  • Avoidance of generalizations
  • No unfounded evaluations
  • Precise technical terminology

Differentiation between own and others' ideas:

  • Subjunctive mood when expressing other people's positions
  • Clear linguistic signals for a change of perspective
  • Sparing but pointed use of quotations

7. dealing with special challenges

Historical distance

Awareness of:

  • Reflecting on one's own location
  • Constructive character of historical narratives
  • Influence of the present perspective on interpretation
  • Danger of political instrumentalization

Interdisciplinary approaches

Openness to:

  • Methods from other disciplines
  • Digital humanities and informatics approaches
  • Statistical methods for suitable questions
  • Cooperation with neighboring disciplines

8. preventive measures and self-monitoring

Technological tools

Recommended measures:

  • Own plagiarism check before submission
  • Use of plagiarism software (also for self-plagiarism)
  • Regular backup of the literature collection
  • Documentation of the work process

Advice and support

In case of uncertainties:

  • Early consultation with the supervisor
  • Use of consultation hours
  • Contact with ombudspersons in the event of problems
  • Participation in method courses

9 Consequences of violations

Consequences under examination law

  • Failure to pass the examination (grade 5.0)
  • Work must be repeated
  • Failure to pass a module in case of repetition

Serious cases

  • Exmatriculation possible
  • Withdrawal of academic degrees
  • Civil law claims (in case of copyright infringement)

10. important contacts and resources

Osnabrück University

Useful links

Note: These instructions are based on the current standards of the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the special requirements of historical research. If you have any questions or uncertainties, please contact your thesis supervisor or the relevant university advisory services.

Status: June 2025