The article adopts a bold approach, analyzing the “locked” state of digital archives not merely as a technical problem, but as a human challenge rooted in “systemic distrust.” This approach brings about a fundamental shift in the research paradigm surrounding digital archives and information science. This is because, unlike previous studies that have primarily focused on developing algorithms and technical solutions, this research demonstrates that even the most advanced technologies lose their effectiveness in the absence of “social capital” and trust among stakeholders. This approach highlights the importance of human trust and the quality of interactions among human actors as essential conditions for the successful use of digital archives, positioning the research as a pioneering and transformative contribution to the field. The article adopts an interdisciplinary approach to analyze this phenomenon, examining its various dimensions simultaneously. Archival and information sciences are employed to analyze operational and professional challenges; Digital Humanities to serve as a bridge between technology and content; technology ethics to examine ethical challenges associated with artificial intelligence; and organizational studies and the sociology of professions to understand the dynamics of trust and collaboration. This interdisciplinary approach was developed through semi-structured interviews with thirty specialists. This method enables a deeper understanding of concepts such as trust, facilitates more comprehensive and in-depth analysis, and provides access to the underlying attitudes, fears, and assumptions of the actors involved. In domestic research, digital archives and artificial intelligence have primarily been examined from two perspectives: technical and engineering, and library and archival studies. Studies with titles such as “Intelligent Algorithms for Information Retrieval in Digital Archives” and “Technical Solutions for the Preservation and Maintenance of Digital Resources” focus primarily on the instrumental and infrastructural dimensions of this phenomenon. By contrast, only a limited number of studies have addressed the human, cultural, and social dimensions of this field. For example, articles focusing on “Ethical Requirements in the Digital Environment” or “Access Policies in National Archives,” although they have addressed issues of trust and ethics, have rarely placed them at the center of their analysis. Moreover, they have not explored the systematic interrelationship between “trust” and “artificial intelligence” as a fundamental issue in unlocking digital archives. through its theoretical boldness, the present article not only addresses a gap in the international literature but also offers a conceptual framework for Persian-speaking researchers, encouraging them to move beyond the dominance of technical approaches and place the examination of “trust” and “human relationships” at the heart of future research on emerging technologies in the fields of archives and information. The translation and critique of this work can initiate interdisciplinary dialogue within the domestic academic community, which appears essential for moving beyond the stage of technological dominance toward the stage of its judicious integration with human values. The findings of the study indicate that distrust in digital archives has three structural dimensions that operate as interconnected barriers. First, interpersonal distrust, or “professional othering,” arising from misunderstandings and a lack of mutual understanding between archivists and researchers. A clear example is the expectation among researchers that archivists preserve “everything,” even though such an undertaking is not practically feasible. The second case is technological distrust, rooted in fears of the erosion of professional authority. Archivists whose professional identities are grounded in control over collections tend to resist against tools that could diminish their authority over those collections. Third, institutional distrust, whereby artificial intelligence is viewed not only as a tool that can reinforce systemic biases but also as a mechanism for legitimizing them. when an algorithm produces a decision, the result may appear objective and impartial, even though it can be shaped by underlying power structures and institutional biases. In addressing these challenges, the article shifts its focus away from technical solutions and emphasizes the need to foster dialogue and meaningful human interaction. The concept of the “archival loop,” as a powerful metaphor, brings all stakeholders—from document producers to final users—within a shared ecosystem of common interests. It suggests that the restoration of this fragmented loop can be achieved through dialogue and mutual understanding. Nevertheless, the study also has certain limitations, including a limited analysis of the distribution of power and privilege among stakeholders and the absence of an operational model for structuring such dialogue in a way that adequately accounts for differences in the institutional positions and levels of access among participants. Overall, this article offers a novel framework for analyzing and making sense of trust. Its scholarly contribution lies not in the development of a new algorithm, but lies in proposing an analytical framework that shifts the pathway toward opening up digital archives from technology to anthropology, and from hardware and software to social capital and human trust. The study’s central message is clear: before making any technical investment, it is essential to invest in trust and human relationships among stakeholders, as trust is what enables the meaningful use of technology and facilitates the development of a dynamic and ethically grounded ecosystem.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………
The research article entitled “Artificial Intelligence in Digital Archives: Trust, Collaboration, and Shared Professional Ethics,” authored by Lise Jaillant of Loughborough University and Arran Rees of the University of Leeds, was published in 2023 in volume 38, issue 2 of Digital Scholarship in the Humanities. The article is published on pages 571–585 and has the DOI 10.1093/llc/fqac073. It was initially made available online through Advance Access on 17 November 2022 and was subsequently peer-reviewed and accepted as a Full Paper. The article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits its use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original source. The article was published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Digital Humanities (EADH). The version cited in this study was retrieved from the publisher’s website.