Terugblik 'Data in the Arts'

On 18 November, a good number of researchers, data stewards, repository managers, grant specialists and other interested parties gathered for the Data in the Arts study day. It was an interesting and lively meeting in which many different aspects of and experiences with (artistic) research in the arts were discussed and shared.

In this e-mail, we provide a brief review and share some of the presentations. The day certainly tasted like more, so we will definitely follow it up. If you have suggestions and ideas for such a sequel, please let us know. You can already help us by just filling out the survey in this link.

Reflections on Artistic Research

Jeroen Boomgaard (University of Amsterdam and Rietveld Academy)

Boomgaard identifies several key challenges that make data management in artistic research particularly complex:

• The type of data artistic researchers use.
  Academic disciplines typically rely on specific research methods and data sets. Artists, however, navigate across multiple disciplines, encountering diverse research methods and data systems for which they often lack formal training.
• Existing data systems are unsuitable for research questions posed by artists.
  The exploratory nature of artistic research often leads to the combination of different fields and the formulation of research questions in ways that can be described as idiosyncratic. Unfortunately, existing data collections are frequently inaccessible or incompatible with this approach.
• Outcomes of artistic research do not fit into existing data collection systems.
  The results of artistic research often take forms—tactile, sensorial, or affective—that lose essential qualities when stored digitally. Traditional documentation methods are inadequate, and current systems lack the capability to effectively store and preserve these unique results.

Boomgaard’s reflections prompt us to consider how we might develop data management systems that respect the unique characteristics of artistic research while enabling it to contribute meaningfully to broader fields of knowledge. This is a challenge that calls for creative thinking and collaboration across disciplines.

What are ‘Data’ in the Arts?

Mapping Data in Artistic Research

This panel discussion, moderated by Jeroen Boomgaard, featured Professional Doctorate candidates Stefan Schäfer (AHK), Reinaart Vanhoe (Willem de Kooning Academy), and Chinouk Filique de Miranda (ArtEZ). Before the discussion began, each candidate introduced their respective research, providing valuable context for the dialogue.

The session explored how artistic research generates unique forms of data, distinct from traditional academic or scientific data. Panelists examined what defines artistic data, how it diverges from conventional research paradigms, and the challenges of managing and interpreting it. Their insights emphasized the creative and contextual dimensions that set artistic data apart.

These introductions and discussions offered attendees a deeper understanding of the relationship between art, research, and data, inspiring fresh perspectives on how knowledge is generated and framed within the arts.

Data Management and the Arts

Sarah Coombs, Content Coordinator DCC-PO

In her keynote Sarah Coombs explored the unique nature and management of research data in the arts. She defined research data as diverse factual records—observations, recordings, or measurements—used to validate findings. Coombs emphasized that in the arts, the boundaries between primary data (e.g., raw sketches or recordings), secondary data (e.g., processed or analyzed materials), and research outputs (e.g., completed artworks) often blur. This overlap arises from the creative and interdisciplinary nature of artistic research, where the process itself can become part of the final result.

With humor, Coombs described the challenge of organizing such data as managing “squirrels at a rave.” She highlighted the importance of Research Data Management (RDM), advocating for early planning, clear documentation, and strategies to ensure security, quality, and reusability. Her advice on creating Data Management Plans (DMPs) addressed ethical, legal, and logistical needs.

Coombs stressed that effective RDM enhances research efficiency, transparency, and integrity while preserving data for future reuse. Her keynote encouraged researchers to adopt tailored approaches to data management that reflect the complexity of creative practices.

Reflections on the workshops

Workshop 'Rethinking Data: Crafting Research Stories through data'

During the workshop 'Rethinking Data: Crafting Research Stories through data' we discussed 'data', Open Science and the FAIR principles in the context of artistic research: how does 'data' in artistic research look like and what possibilities do RDM and Open Science offer for conducting research in the arts? Kelly also presented a flowchart showing that RDM and communication activities are well aligned.'

Workshop 'Data and Consent in Artistic Research'

In the workshop Data and Consent in Artistic Research, PD-researcher Philippine Hoegen and research supporter Judith Leest shared their struggle between standard norms about consent and artistic research practice. We discussed opportunities like consent as a part of the research process, forming a PACT (which fits with the suggestion of joint consent in a collective process, while working on radical inclusivity), the importance of opt-out and beware of peer pressure and various forms of consent. The Ethical Committee for Research turned out to be a critical friend in mutual learning and finding alternative possibilities for consent in this collaborative research work with people with chronic illness and homeless people.

Workshop 'Re-using Data in research and education'

The workshop on Re-using Data in research and education form HKU educators Susan van Esch and Pauline Spaas started with the creative process itself. Participants used colours, scissors and paper or clay to shape the question: how do you feel about ‘data in the arts’ and its reuse?
This prompted fascinating conversations about how we view collection, sharing and perhaps (commissioning) reuse of data.

Some of the comments:

• A better term for data is ‘sources’,
• Certain data may mean nothing in one context but be very useful in another,
• In disciplines outside the arts, storing and sharing non-written sources has often already been thought about, for instance in architecture (scale models) or psychology (description of experiences)
• Resistance to data sharing may arise from our white Western 19th century view of art. A culture change is needed.

Workshop 'Making arts data FAIRly accessible'

The Making arts data FAIRly accessible workshop (moderated by Peter Sonderen) kicked off with a presentation by Alies Baan on what FAIR means for data in artistic research. There were also presentations by Casper Schipper and Martine Teirlinck. Casper is from the Research Catalogue (RC). He showed through a few examples how artistic research can be published in RC, including interim results or datasets. Martine talked about the possibilities of SURF Sharekit.

Sharekit is a repository for permanently archiving research publications, but from where they can also be shared with a simple push of a button on platforms such as Publinova and the HBO Kennisbank (and possibly your own website). The conversations that ensued from the presentations were fascinating and showed that there are still many knowledge gaps to be filled when it comes to FAIR data management and the tools we use to do so.