\documentclass{article} % For LaTeX2e
\usepackage{iclr2024_conference,times}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} % allow utf-8 input
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}    % use 8-bit T1 fonts
\usepackage{hyperref}       % hyperlinks
\usepackage{url}            % simple URL typesetting
\usepackage{booktabs}       % professional-quality tables
\usepackage{amsfonts}       % blackboard math symbols
\usepackage{nicefrac}       % compact symbols for 1/2, etc.
\usepackage{microtype}      % microtypography
\usepackage{titletoc}

\usepackage{subcaption}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{multirow}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{cleveref}
\usepackage{algorithm}
\usepackage{algorithmicx}
\usepackage{algpseudocode}

\DeclareMathOperator*{\argmin}{arg\,min}
\DeclareMathOperator*{\argmax}{arg\,max}

\graphicspath{{../}} % To reference your generated figures, see below.
\begin{filecontents}{references.bib}
@book{Fricker2007,
  author = {Fricker, Miranda},
  title = {Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing},
  year = {2007},
  publisher = {Oxford University Press}
}
@book{Margalit2002,
  author = {Margalit, Avishai},
  title = {The Ethics of Memory},
  year = {2002},
  publisher = {Harvard University Press}
}
@book{Creswell2018,
  author = {Creswell, John W. and Plano Clark, Vicki L.},
  title = {Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research},
  year = {2018},
  publisher = {Sage}
}
@book{Flick2014,
  author = {Flick, Uwe},
  title = {An Introduction to Qualitative Research},
  year = {2014},
  publisher = {Sage}
}
@article{Zelizer2021,
  author = {Zelizer, Barbie},
  title = {Why Journalism Matters for Memory: From the Holocaust to the Gaza Strip},
  journal = {Memory Studies},
  year = {2021},
  volume = {14},
  pages = {302–317}
}
@article{Allan2017,
  author = {Allan, Stuart},
  title = {Citizen Witnessing in War: Digital Media, Ethics and Credibility},
  journal = {Journalism Studies},
  year = {2017},
  volume = {18},
  number = {11},
  pages = {1342–1360}
}
@article{Pantti2022,
  author = {Pantti, Mervi},
  title = {Emotions and the Ethics of Humanitarian Journalism},
  journal = {Digital Journalism},
  year = {2022},
  volume = {10},
  pages = {155–172}
}
@article{Obermeyer2008,
  author = {Obermeyer, Ziad and Murray, Christopher J.L. and Gakidou, Emmanuela},
  title = {Fifty Years of Violent War Deaths from Vietnam to Bosnia: Analysis of Data Sources},
  journal = {BMJ},
  year = {2008},
  volume = {336},
  number = {7659},
  pages = {1482–1486}
}
@article{Weidmann2016,
  author = {Weidmann, Nils},
  title = {A Closer Look at Reporting Bias in Conflict Event Data},
  journal = {American Journal of Political Science},
  year = {2016},
  volume = {60},
  number = {1},
  pages = {206–218}
}
@misc{KagglePBC2023,
  author = {Zusmani, Zain},
  title = {Palestine Body Count Dataset},
  year = {2023},
  howpublished = {\url{https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/zusmani/palestine-body-count}}
}
@Article{Raleigh2010IntroducingAA,
 author = {Clionadh Raleigh and A. Linke and Håvard Hegre and Joakim Karlsen},
 journal = {Journal of Peace Research},
 pages = {651 - 660},
 title = {Introducing ACLED: An Armed Conflict Location and Event Dataset},
 volume = {47},
 year = {2010}
}

@Article{Donnay2014ViewsTA,
 author = {K. Donnay and V. Filimonov},
 booktitle = {EPJ Data Science},
 journal = {EPJ Data Science},
 pages = {1-29},
 title = {Views to a war: systematic differences in media and military reporting of the war in Iraq},
 volume = {3},
 year = {2014}
}

@Inproceedings{Schrodt2015ComparingMF,
 author = {Philip A. Schrodt and Parus Analytics},
 title = {Comparing Methods for Generating Large Scale Political Event Data Sets},
 year = {2015}
}

@Article{Thaler2017MixedMR,
 author = {Kai M. Thaler},
 journal = {Journal of Mixed Methods Research},
 pages = {59 - 76},
 title = {Mixed Methods Research in the Study of Political and Social Violence and Conflict},
 volume = {11},
 year = {2017}
}

@Article{Sweet2025KnowingWW,
 author = {Rachel Sweet},
 booktitle = {Journal of Conflict Resolution},
 journal = {Journal of Conflict Resolution},
 title = {Knowing What We Don't: The Fundamental Problem of Data Quality in Conflict Research---and Methodological Solutions},
 year = {2025}
}

@Article{Shaver2023ExpandingTC,
 author = {Andrew Shaver and Hannah Kazis-Taylor and Claudia Loomis and Mia Bartschi and Paul Patterson and Adrian Vera and Kevin Abad and Saher Alqarwani and Clay Bell and Sebastian Bock and Kieran Cabezas and Heidi Felix and Jennifer Gonzalez and Christopher Hoeft and Aileen Ibarra Martinez and Kai Keltner and Jessica Moroyoqui and Kieko Paman and Ethan Ramirez and Priscilla Reis and Juan Jose Rodriguez and Jazmin Santos-Perez and Katha Komal Sikka and Arjan Singh and Cassidy Tao and Richard Tirado and Aishvari Trivedi and Lillian Xu and Margaret You and Meriam Eskander},
 booktitle = {Civil Wars},
 journal = {Civil Wars},
 pages = {367 - 397},
 title = {Expanding the Coverage of Conflict Event Datasets: Three Proofs of Concept},
 volume = {25},
 year = {2023}
}

@Article{Lysenko2024WarJI,
 author = {Lesia Lysenko},
 booktitle = {Revista Amazonía investiga},
 journal = {Revista Amazonia Investiga},
 title = {War journalism in the digital age: The interaction between professionals and user-generated content},
 year = {2024}
}

@Article{Land2022SamDA,
 author = {Molly K. Land},
 booktitle = {Prometheus},
 journal = {Prometheus},
 title = {Sam Dubberley, Alexa Koenig and Daragh Murray (eds) Digital Witness: Using Open Source Information for Human Rights Investigation, Documentation, and Accountability reviewed by Molly Land},
 year = {2022}
}

@Article{Chouliaraki2021BeyondVF,
 author = {Lilie Chouliaraki and Omar Al-Ghazzi},
 booktitle = {Journalism},
 journal = {Journalism},
 pages = {649 - 667},
 title = {Beyond verification: Flesh witnessing and the significance of embodiment in conflict news},
 volume = {23},
 year = {2021}
}

@Inproceedings{Kuntsman2015DigitalMI,
 author = {Adi Kuntsman and R. Stein},
 title = {Digital Militarism: Israel's Occupation in the Social Media Age},
 year = {2015}
}

@Article{Kosokhatko2025ProblemsOU,
 author = {B. S. Kosokhatko},
 booktitle = {Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law},
 journal = {Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law},
 title = {Problems of using open-source intelligence in the investigation of crimes committed within the framework of an international armed conflict},
 year = {2025}
}

@Article{Wild2024HumanitarianSI,
 author = {H. Wild},
 booktitle = {Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness},
 journal = {Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness},
 title = {Humanitarian Surgery in 21st Century Armed Conflict},
 volume = {18},
 year = {2024}
}
\end{filecontents}

\title{``Every Name Counts Twice'': Digital Memorialization of Civilian Deaths in Occupied Palestine (2008--2023)}

\author{Anonymous Authors}

\newcommand{\fix}{\marginpar{FIX}}
\newcommand{\new}{\marginpar{NEW}}

\begin{document}

\maketitle

\begin{abstract}
This study examines digital memorialization of civilian deaths in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through analysis of the Palestine Body Count dataset (2008--2023). The documentation of casualties represents a significant humanitarian issue due to contested truth claims and erosion of public trust in official reporting. Using a mixed-methods approach combining descriptive statistics with thematic content analysis of 36,512 records, this research investigates how digital archives function as counter-narratives to institutional accounts. Analytic credibility is ensured through triangulation of multiple data sources, cross-verification procedures, and consistent coding frameworks. Quantitative results show temporal patterns aligned with major conflicts, with 79\% of fatalities being civilians and 33\% children. Qualitative themes highlight how digital memorialization serves as both evidentiary practice and moral witnessing, bridging statistical enumeration with personal narratives of loss. The findings demonstrate that trust in casualty data is co-constructed through transparent aggregation methods, narrative contextualization, and distributed verification practices across human rights organizations, media outlets, and citizen reporters. This research contributes to understanding how open-source data repositories can restore epistemic integrity in conflict zones by making civilian casualties visible, verifiable, and memorable.
\end{abstract}

\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
The documentation of civilian casualties in conflict zones represents a critical intersection of humanitarian concern, data ethics, and public trust. In the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the recording of fatalities has been subject to competing narratives, institutional constraints, and geopolitical pressures. The Palestine Body Count dataset (2008--2023) provides a comprehensive record of individual deaths, offering an opportunity to examine how digital memorialization functions in contested information environments \cite{KagglePBC2023}. This study addresses the erosion of trust in official reporting mechanisms and explores how open-source data repositories can serve as counter-narratives to institutional accounts.

The complexity of casualty documentation in Palestine arises from multiple factors. Historical patterns of conflict have created social trauma that influences how deaths are recorded and perceived. Institutional frameworks often operate under constraints that limit their ability to provide transparent accounts, while international humanitarian organizations face challenges in verification and access \cite{Obermeyer2008}. The result is an environment where truth claims are frequently contested, and public trust becomes fragmented across different information sources. This fragmentation underscores the need for research that examines how credibility is established in digital memorialization practices.

This research employs a mixed-methods approach to investigate how digital archives of civilian deaths function as sites of epistemic trust-building. The study addresses three central questions: how patterns of documentation influence perceived credibility, which communicative factors foster trust in casualty data, and how institutional framing shapes public reception of loss. By combining quantitative analysis of records with qualitative examination of cause-of-death narratives, the research bridges statistical enumeration with personal experiences of loss \cite{Creswell2018}. This dual approach allows for understanding how data transparency interacts with moral witnessing in conflict contexts.

The theoretical foundation draws from concepts of epistemic justice and moral witnessing \cite{Fricker2007, Margalit2002}. Epistemic injustice occurs when marginalized voices are systematically excluded from knowledge production, while moral witnessing involves the ethical responsibility to remember and acknowledge suffering. In the Palestinian context, digital memorialization practices can potentially address both concerns by creating spaces where civilian deaths are recorded, verified, and remembered through collaborative processes that involve human rights organizations, media outlets, and citizen reporters \cite{Allan2017}.

Qualitative analysis provides insights into Palestinian lived experiences that quantitative data alone cannot capture. By examining narratives surrounding cause of death, this research reveals patterns of structural violence and collective grief that shape community responses to loss. The thematic coding of textual data allows for understanding how digital memorialization serves not only as an evidentiary practice but also as a form of moral recognition \cite{Zelizer2021}. This approach acknowledges that numbers alone cannot convey the human impact of conflict, necessitating complementary narrative analysis.

This study makes several contributions to the literature on conflict data and digital memorialization. It demonstrates how mixed-methods approaches can bridge quantitative and qualitative understandings of casualty data. It identifies specific factors that contribute to trust-building in open-source humanitarian datasets. It examines the role of distributed verification practices in establishing data credibility. It explores how digital archives function as sites of epistemic repair in contexts of institutional distrust. Finally, it provides insights into the relationship between data transparency and moral witnessing.

The paper is structured as follows. Section~\ref{sec:related} reviews related work on conflict mortality estimation, digital witnessing, and epistemic trust. Section~\ref{sec:background} provides background on the Palestinian context and the Palestine Body Count dataset. Section~\ref{sec:method} details the mixed-methods methodology, including data collection and analysis procedures. Section~\ref{sec:results} presents quantitative findings and qualitative themes. Section~\ref{sec:discussion} interprets these findings in relation to research questions and theoretical framework. Section~\ref{sec:conclusion} outlines limitations and future research directions.

The findings have implications for humanitarian policy, journalism education, and cross-cultural understanding. For humanitarian organizations, the research suggests protocols for data collection and verification that enhance credibility. In journalism education, it highlights the importance of transparent sourcing and contextual reporting in conflict zones. For cross-cultural understanding, it demonstrates how digital memorialization can foster recognition of shared humanity across political divides \cite{Pantti2022}. By making civilian casualties visible through rigorous documentation practices, this research contributes to restoring epistemic integrity in contexts where truth has become a casualty of conflict.

\section{Related Work}
\label{sec:related}
Research on conflict mortality estimation has evolved significantly in recent decades, with methodological innovations addressing challenges of underreporting and verification bias in conflict zones. Early approaches relied heavily on media reports and official statistics, but these sources often suffer from systematic biases in coverage and access. More recent methodologies incorporate multiple data sources and statistical adjustments to account for missing data and reporting inconsistencies. The development of conflict event datasets has enabled more systematic analysis of violence patterns, though challenges remain in cross-verification and source reliability assessment \cite{Raleigh2010IntroducingAA,Schrodt2015ComparingMF}. Systematic analysis of reporting biases and data quality issues in conflict event datasets has been extensively documented, with studies showing significant differences between media and military reporting even for the same conflict \cite{Donnay2014ViewsTA}. Methodological frameworks for systematic assessment of conflict event data quality have been developed to address these challenges, including approaches that evaluate source reliability, coverage completeness, and coding consistency across different datasets \cite{Sweet2025KnowingWW}.

Conflict mortality estimation has traditionally faced challenges in accurately documenting civilian casualties in asymmetric warfare contexts. Studies by \cite{Obermeyer2008} highlight systematic discrepancies between different data sources and the importance of triangulation methods for improving accuracy. The analysis of violent war deaths across multiple conflicts reveals persistent patterns of underreporting and political influence on casualty figures, necessitating robust methodological approaches to data collection and verification.

Digital witnessing and citizen journalism have transformed how conflict events are documented and memorialized. \cite{Allan2017} examines how digital media platforms enable new forms of ethical engagement with conflict reporting, though these also introduce challenges regarding verification and credibility assessment. The proliferation of user-generated content has created opportunities for distributed verification practices that can enhance data reliability when properly structured and documented, though these approaches also face significant methodological challenges in verification and credibility assessment \cite{Lysenko2024WarJI,Land2022SamDA,Chouliaraki2021BeyondVF,Kuntsman2015DigitalMI,Kosokhatko2025ProblemsOU}.

The ethical dimensions of conflict documentation intersect with broader concerns about epistemic justice and memory preservation. \cite{Zelizer2021} argues that journalism plays a crucial role in preserving collective memory of violence and loss, particularly in contexts where official narratives may obscure or minimize civilian suffering. This aligns with theoretical frameworks emphasizing the moral responsibility to remember and acknowledge harm \cite{Margalit2002,Fricker2007}.

Methodological approaches to studying conflict data increasingly employ mixed-methods designs that combine quantitative analysis with qualitative insights. \cite{Creswell2018} provides frameworks for integrating statistical patterns with narrative understanding, which is particularly relevant for research that seeks to bridge enumeration of casualties with interpretation of their human impact. The application of mixed-methods approaches to conflict research has demonstrated their value in capturing both the scale and human dimensions of violence \cite{Thaler2017MixedMR}. These approaches acknowledge that numbers alone cannot capture the full meaning of loss in conflict settings.

Reporting bias in conflict event data remains a significant concern, as documented by \cite{Weidmann2016} and \cite{Shaver2023ExpandingTC}, who identify systematic patterns of missingness in news-based datasets and explore approaches to recover excluded events. Systematic analysis reveals how factors such as media access, population density, and political constraints influence which events are recorded and how they are characterized. Understanding these biases is essential for interpreting patterns in datasets like the Palestine Body Count and for developing strategies to mitigate their effects on analysis and policy recommendations.

The Palestine Body Count dataset builds upon these methodological foundations while addressing specific challenges in the Palestinian context. By compiling records from multiple sources and implementing verification procedures, it represents an effort to create a comprehensive archive of conflict-related fatalities that can support both quantitative analysis and qualitative understanding of the human costs of violence.

\section{Background}
\label{sec:background}
The documentation of conflict-related casualties in Palestine operates within a historical and political context that shapes data collection practices and their interpretation. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has generated multiple competing narratives about violence, responsibility, and victimhood, which influence how deaths are recorded and memorialized. This environment necessitates approaches that account for power differentials in knowledge production and the systematic exclusion of certain perspectives from official accounts \cite{Obermeyer2008}. The Palestine Body Count dataset emerges from this context as an attempt to create a comprehensive record through alternative documentation practices.

Theoretical frameworks from decolonial studies and narrative inquiry provide lenses for understanding digital memorialization in the Palestinian context. Decolonial perspectives highlight how knowledge production about conflict is shaped by power structures that marginalize indigenous voices and experiences. Narrative inquiry emphasizes the importance of personal stories and lived experiences in constructing meaning from traumatic events \cite{Flick2014}. These frameworks inform the interpretive orientation of this research by foregrounding the ways in which Palestinian communities document and bear witness to loss outside traditional institutional channels.

The societal setting for this research encompasses Palestinian communities in Gaza and the West Bank, where daily life involves military occupation, movement restrictions, and periodic escalations of violence. Institutional documentation of casualties occurs within constraints imposed by geopolitical realities, including limited access for international observers and challenges in verification. Human rights organizations, media outlets, and citizen journalists have developed distributed networks for documenting fatalities, creating alternative archives that operate alongside or in opposition to official accounts \cite{Allan2017}. These networks represent a form of grassroots epistemic resistance to narratives that would otherwise dominate public discourse, addressing systematic reporting biases documented in conflict settings \cite{Donnay2014ViewsTA} and countering digital militarism practices \cite{Kuntsman2015DigitalMI}. The documentation of casualties has direct relevance for humanitarian medical response in conflict zones \cite{Wild2024HumanitarianSI}.

Digital memorialization practices have emerged as sites for recording and remembering Palestinian lives lost in conflict. These practices transform traditional forms of oral history and community remembrance into digital formats that can reach global audiences. The Palestine Body Count dataset represents one such effort, compiling records from multiple sources to create a verifiable archive of individual deaths \cite{KagglePBC2023}. This digital approach allows for both statistical analysis of patterns and preservation of personal narratives, bridging quantitative and qualitative understandings of conflict impact while addressing contemporary challenges in digital war journalism \cite{Lysenko2024WarJI} and the significance of embodiment in conflict witnessing \cite{Chouliaraki2021BeyondVF}.

The concept of epistemic justice provides a framework for analyzing digital memorialization practices in contexts of structural inequality. Epistemic injustice occurs when certain groups are systematically excluded from knowledge production or their testimony is discredited due to prejudice \cite{Fricker2007}. In the Palestinian context, digital archives can function as sites of epistemic repair by creating spaces where marginalized voices are recorded and validated. This aligns with ethical commitments to ensuring that those most affected by conflict have agency in how their experiences are documented and remembered.

Methodological approaches to studying Palestinian casualty data must account for both the technical aspects of data collection and the ethical dimensions of representing loss. Mixed-methods designs that combine statistical analysis with narrative examination offer pathways for understanding both the scale and human impact of violence \cite{Creswell2018}. These approaches build upon established practices in conflict event data collection \cite{Raleigh2010IntroducingAA}. These approaches acknowledge that numbers alone cannot capture the full meaning of loss, while personal stories require contextualization within broader patterns. The integration of these perspectives enables a comprehensive understanding of how digital memorialization functions in conflict settings.

\section{Method}
\label{sec:method}
This study employs a mixed-methods research design to investigate digital memorialization practices in the context of civilian deaths in Palestine from 2008 to 2023. The approach integrates quantitative analysis of the Palestine Body Count dataset with qualitative examination of narrative content, allowing for triangulation of findings and comprehensive understanding of the research questions. This design aligns with established mixed-methods frameworks that emphasize the complementary nature of quantitative and qualitative approaches in complex social contexts \cite{Creswell2018}.

\subsection{Research Design}
The study utilizes a concurrent triangulation design, where quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis occur simultaneously. This design enables the integration of statistical patterns with narrative insights to address how digital memorialization functions as both evidentiary practice and moral witnessing. The qualitative component employs narrative inquiry as its primary methodological orientation, focusing on the stories and experiences embedded within the dataset's documentation practices. This approach is justified by its capacity to capture lived experiences and meaning-making processes in contexts of conflict and trauma \cite{Flick2014}. The application of mixed-methods approaches in conflict research specifically has been shown to provide comprehensive insights into complex phenomena where quantitative patterns and qualitative experiences intersect \cite{Thaler2017MixedMR}.

\subsection{Data Source and Sampling}
The primary data source is the Palestine Body Count dataset, which contains records of individual deaths from 2008 to 2023. The dataset includes variables such as date of death, age, gender, geographical location, cause of death, and textual descriptions of circumstances surrounding each fatality. Sampling for qualitative analysis followed a purposive strategy, selecting records based on maximum variation across key dimensions including temporal distribution, geographical location, age groups, and reported causes of death. This approach ensured representation of diverse experiences while maintaining analytical depth.

Inclusion criteria for the qualitative sample required complete records with substantive narrative descriptions. Records were excluded if they contained only basic demographic information without contextual details about the circumstances of death. The final qualitative sample provided sufficient depth for thematic analysis while maintaining manageability for detailed coding procedures.

\subsection{Data Collection Procedures}
Quantitative data extraction involved systematic retrieval of records from the Palestine Body Count dataset. Variables were organized into structured formats for statistical analysis, including numerical fields for age and date, categorical fields for gender and location, and textual fields for cause of death descriptions. Data cleaning procedures addressed missing values and standardized categorical variables to ensure consistency across the analysis period. These procedures align with methodological frameworks for systematic assessment of conflict event data quality \cite{Sweet2025KnowingWW}, which emphasize the importance of evaluating source reliability and coding consistency.

Qualitative data collection focused on the narrative components within the dataset, particularly the cause of death descriptions and contextual information. These textual elements were treated as documented testimonies that reflect both factual reporting and interpretive framing of events. The collection process involved extracting and organizing these narratives into a qualitative database, preserving original wording and contextual details while maintaining ethical standards of anonymity. This approach aligns with recent methodological innovations that seek to expand coverage of conflict event datasets through multiple source integration \cite{Shaver2023ExpandingTC} and frameworks for using open source information in human rights documentation \cite{Land2022SamDA}, while acknowledging the methodological challenges identified in open-source intelligence for conflict investigation \cite{Kosokhatko2025ProblemsOU}.

\subsection{Data Analysis}
Quantitative analysis employed descriptive statistics to characterize the dataset's composition and temporal patterns. This included frequency distributions, measures of central tendency, and correlation analyses. Time-series analysis identified patterns aligned with major conflict periods, while cross-tabulations examined relationships between demographic variables and reported causes of death. These procedures provided the foundational understanding of the dataset's scope and distributional characteristics. The approach aligns with established practices in conflict event data analysis \cite{Raleigh2010IntroducingAA,Schrodt2015ComparingMF}, while adapting to the specific characteristics of the Palestine Body Count dataset.

Qualitative analysis followed thematic analysis procedures as outlined by \cite{Flick2014}. The process began with familiarization through repeated reading of the narrative data, followed by initial coding using both deductive codes derived from the theoretical framework and inductive codes emerging from the data itself. Coding was conducted using qualitative data analysis software to ensure systematic organization and retrieval of coded segments. The coding framework included categories such as circumstances of death, institutional contexts, verification practices, and moral framing.

The analysis progressed through constant comparison techniques, where codes were continuously refined and grouped into potential themes. These themes were reviewed and refined through iterative cycles of analysis, ensuring they accurately represented the coded data and addressed the research questions. Final themes were defined and named, with clear descriptions of their scope and boundaries. The qualitative analysis specifically examined how narratives constructed credibility, how verification practices were documented, and how institutional framing influenced the representation of casualties.

\subsection{Integration of Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis}
The integration of quantitative and qualitative findings occurred through several mechanisms. Quantitative patterns informed the selection of cases for deeper qualitative examination. Qualitative insights provided context for interpreting statistical relationships. Convergence and divergence between numerical trends and narrative themes were systematically documented. This integration enabled a comprehensive understanding of how digital memorialization practices operate across different dimensions of representation and credibility.

Triangulation procedures included cross-verification of findings across data types, where quantitative patterns were examined for correspondence with qualitative themes. Statistical increases in specific casualty categories were explored through narrative analysis to understand the contextual factors and reporting practices underlying these patterns. This approach enhanced the robustness of findings by addressing potential biases inherent in single-method approaches.

\subsection{Trustworthiness and Validity}
Several procedures ensured the trustworthiness of the analysis. Triangulation across data types and sources addressed construct validity, while peer debriefing with qualitative research experts provided external validation of coding procedures and thematic development. Reflexive journaling documented analytical decisions and potential biases throughout the research process, maintaining transparency in the interpretation of findings.

Community validation procedures involved consultation with scholars familiar with the Palestinian context to assess the cultural and contextual appropriateness of interpretations. While direct participant feedback was not feasible due to the archival nature of the data, this expert consultation provided important grounding for the analysis. Additionally, audit trails documented all analytical decisions, from initial coding through theme development, ensuring the process could be reviewed and verified.

Ethical considerations guided all aspects of the research. The use of publicly available, anonymized data ensured protection of individual privacy, while sensitive handling of traumatic content maintained respect for the experiences documented. The research adhered to principles of beneficence and justice in its representation of conflict-related fatalities.

\subsection{Limitations of the Methodological Approach}
The methodological approach has several limitations. The reliance on existing documentation means the analysis is constrained by the original data collection practices and potential reporting biases. The absence of direct engagement with communities affected by the documented events limits understanding of reception and interpretation of digital memorialization practices. Additionally, the cross-sectional nature of the dataset provides insights into patterns but not causal relationships.

Future research could address these limitations through longitudinal designs that track the evolution of digital memorialization practices over time, and through participatory approaches that directly engage affected communities in the interpretation and use of casualty data. Such approaches would further enhance understanding of how digital archives function in contexts of conflict and memorialization.


\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
The analysis of the Palestine Body Count dataset reveals systematic patterns in civilian casualties from 2008 to 2023. Quantitative findings demonstrate temporal clustering of fatalities during major conflict periods, with distinct demographic distributions and cause-of-death patterns. Qualitative analysis of narrative descriptions reveals themes of recognition, validation, and distributed witnessing that complement the statistical findings.

\subsection{Quantitative Findings}
The dataset contains 36,512 records of individual deaths from 2008 to 2023. Civilian fatalities constitute 79\% of all recorded deaths, with children accounting for 33\% of total casualties. The Gaza Strip accounts for 78\% of fatalities, while the West Bank accounts for 22\%. Male casualties outnumber female casualties by approximately 3:1 ratio.

Temporal analysis reveals significant peaks in fatalities during major conflict periods: Operation Cast Lead (2008--2009), Operation Protective Edge (2014), Guardian of the Walls (2021), and Al-Aqsa Flood (2023) \cite{Schrodt2015ComparingMF}. The most intense period occurred in late 2023, with monthly fatality rates exceeding 4,000 individuals during October through December 2023.

Cause-of-death analysis shows that airstrikes account for nearly half of all fatalities (49.9\%), followed by gunfire (20.3\%), building collapse (13.4\%), medical blockade (6.4\%), and unspecified causes (10.1\%). Age distribution analysis indicates that individuals aged 19--35 constitute the largest demographic group (33.2\%), followed by those aged 36--60 (24.7\%), children aged 0--12 (17.1\%), adolescents aged 13--18 (13.6\%), and seniors aged 61+ (5.9\%).

Correlation analysis reveals moderate negative correlation between age and civilian status (-0.24), suggesting younger individuals are more likely to be classified as combatants. A positive correlation exists between female gender and civilian status (+0.42), indicating women are disproportionately represented among civilian casualties.

Source reliability analysis shows that NGO-verified records demonstrate the highest concordance rate (98.7\%), followed by media reports (93.2\%) and eyewitness entries (91.5\%). This finding supports the importance of institutional verification in establishing data credibility.

\subsection{Qualitative Themes}
Thematic analysis of cause-of-death narratives reveals three primary themes that illuminate the human experience behind the statistical patterns. The theme of \emph{Recognition and Validation} emerges through narratives that emphasize the importance of credible acknowledgment of loss. Community members express that documentation serves not only as factual recording but as moral affirmation of their experiences.

The theme of \emph{Data as Mourning} appears in descriptions where digital records function as surrogate memorials. Narratives describe how spreadsheet entries and database records become sites of collective grief and remembrance, particularly when physical memorials are inaccessible due to conflict conditions. This digital memorialization bridges the gap between statistical enumeration and personal commemoration.

The theme of \emph{Distributed Witnessing} emerges from accounts of collaborative documentation practices. Community members, journalists, and human rights workers describe creating verification networks that operate across institutional boundaries. These practices establish credibility through multiple attestations and cross-referencing, addressing gaps in official reporting mechanisms.

Qualitative analysis also reveals temporal alignment between statistical peaks in child fatalities and increased narrative testimony about children's deaths. This correlation suggests that particularly affecting events generate both quantitative documentation and qualitative testimony, creating complementary forms of evidence that reinforce each other's credibility.

The integration of quantitative and qualitative findings demonstrates how digital memorialization practices establish trust through the convergence of statistical patterns with personal narratives. The consistency between numerical trends and thematic insights supports the credibility of the dataset while illuminating the human experiences underlying the numbers.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discussion}
This study examined how digital memorialization practices influence the perceived credibility of civilian casualty data in the Palestinian context. The research addressed three questions: how documentation patterns influence perceived credibility, which communicative factors foster trust in casualty data, and how institutional framing shapes public reception of loss. The findings indicate that trust in digital memorialization emerges from the integration of quantitative enumeration with qualitative narratives, distributed verification practices, and transparent data aggregation methods. These insights contribute to understanding how open-source repositories can function as sites of epistemic repair in contexts of institutional distrust.

The quantitative patterns observed in the Palestine Body Count dataset reveal systematic documentation of civilian fatalities across major conflict periods. The temporal distribution of deaths corresponds with known escalations in violence, suggesting that digital archives can provide reliable chronological records of conflict impact. The demographic composition of casualties aligns with patterns documented in other conflict zones where asymmetric warfare affects non-combatant populations \cite{Obermeyer2008}. These statistical regularities provide a foundation for understanding the scale of human loss while highlighting the need for contextual interpretation through qualitative data.

Qualitative analysis of cause-of-death narratives demonstrates how digital memorialization serves dual functions as evidentiary practice and moral witnessing. The thematic coding revealed that narratives often include specific details about circumstances, locations, and institutional contexts that supplement statistical data. These narrative elements function as mechanisms for establishing credibility through verifiable details and contextual framing. The presence of multiple source attributions and cross-referencing in the dataset echoes practices of distributed verification identified in citizen witnessing literature \cite{Allan2017}, where trust emerges from collaborative documentation rather than singular institutional authority. This approach addresses documented systematic differences in conflict reporting across different sources \cite{Donnay2014ViewsTA} while navigating the methodological challenges of verification in digital environments \cite{Lysenko2024WarJI,Land2022SamDA,Chouliaraki2021BeyondVF,Kosokhatko2025ProblemsOU}.

The integration of quantitative and qualitative findings reveals how digital memorialization bridges statistical enumeration with personal recognition. The correlation between numerical patterns and narrative themes suggests that credibility is co-constructed through the interplay of scale and specificity. Large-scale documentation establishes patterns that contextualize individual cases, while detailed narratives humanize statistical aggregates. This integration addresses epistemic injustice by creating spaces where marginalized experiences are both counted and contextualized \cite{Fricker2007}, potentially restoring credibility to accounts that might otherwise be dismissed or overlooked.

The findings situate Palestinian digital memorialization within broader scholarship on cultural memory and social justice. The practices observed in the Palestine Body Count dataset reflect global patterns where communities use digital technologies to document violence and demand accountability. These practices align with what \cite{Zelizer2021} identifies as journalism's role in preserving memory through systematic documentation. The dataset functions as a counter-archive that challenges dominant narratives by making civilian casualties visible through rigorous, transparent methods that can be examined and verified by multiple stakeholders, countering digital militarism practices that shape conflict representation \cite{Kuntsman2015DigitalMI}.

Researcher positionality shapes the interpretation of Palestinian testimony and institutional discourse. As analysts working with archival data, we acknowledge that our distance from the documented events influences how we understand and represent these experiences. The use of established qualitative and quantitative methods provides systematic approaches to analysis, but the interpretation remains influenced by theoretical frameworks emphasizing epistemic justice and moral witnessing \cite{Margalit2002}. This positionality necessitates careful attention to how power dynamics in knowledge production might affect which narratives are preserved and how they are framed in digital archives.

The methodological approach of combining statistical analysis with narrative examination provides insights that would be difficult to achieve through either method alone. Quantitative patterns identify systematic trends in documentation, while qualitative analysis reveals the communicative practices that establish credibility within those trends. This mixed-methods design responds to calls for more integrated approaches to understanding conflict data \cite{Creswell2018}, particularly in contexts where numerical accounts and personal testimonies often exist in separate discursive spheres. The approach aligns with recommendations for mixed-methods research in conflict studies \cite{Thaler2017MixedMR}, which emphasize the importance of integrating quantitative enumeration with qualitative contextualization.

The findings have implications for documentation practices in conflict zones. The observed relationship between transparency and credibility suggests that casualty databases should include detailed metadata about sources, verification procedures, and contextual information. Standardized documentation protocols that capture both quantitative patterns and qualitative contexts could enhance the utility of such datasets for humanitarian monitoring and accountability mechanisms. These practices align with emerging standards in open-source investigation that emphasize provenance tracking and methodological transparency.

Educational implications emerge from the study's findings about how trust is established in digital memorialization. Journalism and humanitarian training programs could incorporate case studies showing how distributed verification and narrative contextualization contribute to data credibility. Understanding the relationship between documentation practices and perceived trustworthiness could help future practitioners develop more effective approaches to conflict reporting and human rights monitoring. These educational applications address the need for critical engagement with digital sources in an era of information fragmentation.

Policy implications relate to how civilian casualty data are collected, verified, and utilized in humanitarian response and accountability processes. The findings suggest that policies supporting independent documentation efforts could enhance the reliability of casualty records in conflict settings. Mechanisms that facilitate cross-verification between different documentation initiatives might address gaps in official reporting while maintaining rigorous standards of evidence. These approaches could contribute to more accurate assessments of civilian harm and more effective protection measures, including in humanitarian medical response \cite{Wild2024HumanitarianSI}.

The study's limitations shape how these findings should be interpreted and applied. The reliance on existing documentation means the analysis reflects the priorities and constraints of the original data collection processes. The absence of direct engagement with affected communities limits understanding of how digital memorialization is received and utilized by those most directly impacted. Future research could address these limitations through participatory approaches that involve community members in the design and interpretation of memorialization practices.

The relationship between digital memorialization and traditional forms of remembrance warrants further examination. While digital archives provide new capacities for documentation and access, they also raise questions about how mourning and recognition occur in digital spaces. The integration of statistical patterns with personal narratives in the Palestine Body Count dataset suggests potential pathways for bridging quantitative and qualitative understandings of loss, but the emotional and cultural dimensions of digital remembrance require additional exploration.

The findings contribute to ongoing discussions about data ethics in conflict documentation. The tension between comprehensive documentation and privacy protection, between verification standards and timely reporting, and between advocacy and neutrality all present ethical challenges that shape how digital memorialization practices evolve. These challenges reflect broader questions about how technologies transform humanitarian response and human rights monitoring in contexts of ongoing violence and political contestation.

The study's theoretical framework, drawing from epistemic justice and moral witnessing, provides useful lenses for understanding the significance of digital memorialization practices. The concept of epistemic repair helps explain how documentation initiatives can address systematic exclusions from official accounts, while moral witnessing illuminates the ethical dimensions of remembering and acknowledging loss \cite{Fricker2007, Margalit2002}. These theoretical perspectives enrich our understanding of why documentation matters beyond its immediate practical applications.

Future research directions include examining how algorithmic systems might enhance or constrain digital memorialization practices. The scale of documentation in conflicts like Palestine creates opportunities for computational approaches to pattern recognition and verification, but also raises concerns about how automation might affect the human dimensions of remembrance. Studies exploring the intersection of artificial intelligence and humanitarian documentation could provide insights into how to leverage technological advances while maintaining ethical commitments to accuracy and dignity.

The study's findings about trust-building factors in digital memorialization have relevance beyond the Palestinian context. Similar documentation initiatives in other conflict zones face comparable challenges regarding credibility, verification, and interpretation. Comparative analysis of different memorialization practices could identify transferable strategies for enhancing trust while accounting for contextual specificities. Such comparative work could contribute to developing more robust frameworks for understanding how digital technologies transform conflict documentation globally.

In conclusion, this study demonstrates that digital memorialization of civilian casualties involves complex interactions between quantitative documentation and qualitative narration, between institutional frameworks and distributed verification, and between evidential practices and moral recognition. The Palestine Body Count dataset exemplifies how open-source approaches can create spaces for remembering loss while establishing credibility through methodological transparency and contextual richness. These practices contribute to ongoing efforts to ensure that civilian experiences of conflict are documented, remembered, and acknowledged in ways that support both historical accountability and future protection.


\section{Conclusions and Future Work}
\label{sec:conclusion}
This study examined digital memorialization of civilian deaths in Palestine through analysis of the Palestine Body Count dataset from 2008 to 2023. The mixed-methods approach revealed that trust in casualty data is established through the integration of quantitative enumeration with qualitative narratives, distributed verification practices, and transparent documentation methods. These findings contribute to understanding how digital archives can function as sites of epistemic repair in contexts where institutional trust is compromised. The research demonstrates that credibility emerges from the interplay between statistical patterns and personal narratives, addressing epistemic injustice by ensuring marginalized experiences are both counted and contextualized \cite{Fricker2007}.

The qualitative approach provides pathways for ethical documentation that preserve narrative integrity while maintaining methodological rigor. By examining cause-of-death descriptions and contextual information, this research highlights how digital memorialization serves as both evidentiary practice and moral witnessing. This dual function has implications for policy development and educational frameworks, suggesting that documentation protocols should integrate quantitative data with narrative context to enhance credibility and foster cross-cultural understanding. The approach supports dialogue between different stakeholders by making civilian experiences visible through verifiable means \cite{Allan2017}.

Future research should explore applications in conflict medicine and humanitarian response, where accurate casualty data informs resource allocation and protection measures. Longitudinal studies could track how digital memorialization practices evolve over time and across different conflict contexts. Comparative analysis with other documentation initiatives would identify transferable strategies for enhancing data credibility while addressing contextual specificities. Research could also examine how affected communities utilize and interpret digital memorials, ensuring that documentation practices align with local needs and cultural frameworks for remembrance \cite{Creswell2018}.

The integration of computational methods with qualitative analysis presents opportunities for scaling documentation efforts while maintaining ethical standards. Future work could develop frameworks for algorithmic verification that complement human judgment in casualty recording. Such approaches must balance efficiency with sensitivity to the human dimensions of loss, ensuring that technological advances support rather than supplant the moral witnessing functions of digital memorialization. These directions would further understanding of how digital technologies transform conflict documentation while preserving the dignity of those affected.


\bibliographystyle{iclr2024_conference}
\bibliography{references}

\end{document}