Search (46 results, page 3 of 3)

0.0012881019 = product of:
  0.007728611 = sum of:
    0.007728611 = weight(_text_:in in 353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007728611 = score(doc=353,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 353, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=353)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The information professions need a paradigmatic shift to address the epistemicide happening within our field and the ways we have systematically undermined knowledge systems falling outside of Western traditions. Epistemicide is the killing, silencing, annihilation, or devaluing of a knowledge system. We argue epistemicide happens when epistemic injustices are persistent and systematic and collectively work as a structured and systemic oppression of particular ways of knowing. We present epistemicide as a conceptual approach for understanding and analyzing ways knowledge systems are silenced or devalued within Information Science. We extend Fricker's framework by: (a) identifying new types of epistemic injustices, and (b) by adding to Fricker's concepts of Primary and Secondary Harm and introducing the concept of a Third Harm happening at an intergenerational level. Addressing epistemicide is critical for information professionals because we task ourselves with handling knowledge from every field. Acknowledgement of and taking steps to interrupt epistemic injustices and these specific harms are supportive of the social justice movements already happening. This paper serves as an interruption of epistemic injustice by presenting actions toward justice in the form of operationalized interventions of epistemicide.

Series

Special issue: Paradigm shift in the field of information

0.0012881019 = product of:
  0.007728611 = sum of:
    0.007728611 = weight(_text_:in in 382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007728611 = score(doc=382,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 382, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=382)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The individualistic lens refers to the understanding of problematic information as something that is clearly identifiable, with objective criteria of measurement. This article argues for adding a non-individualistic lens for understanding information. The necessity for adding a non-individualistic lens grows from that the existing individualistic lens appears inadequate to make sense of information phenomenon, in particular when it comes to understanding problematic information. Non-individualistic is proposed as a complementary perspective, which needs to be further developed conceptually. To begin such development, this article directs information professionals' attention to the promising concept of information ecology. More specifically, this article pulls resources from philosophy of information (Floridi's infosphere) and information ethics (Capurro's Angeletics) to illustrate existing conceptualizations of information ecology. Information ecology appears to align with this sociotechnical view that information researchers have started to develop in the most recent years, though arguably information ecology may have an even broader scope. Lastly, this article also points out that the conceptualization of information ecology needs to be aware of, and cautious of the philosophical assumption that is relied on for understanding information.

Series

Special issue: Paradigm shift in the field of information

0.0012620769 = product of:
  0.0075724614 = sum of:
    0.0075724614 = weight(_text_:in in 487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075724614 = score(doc=487,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 487, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=487)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

In information science, writing, printing, telecommunication, and digital computing have been central concerns because of their ability to distribute information. Overlooked is the obvious fact that these technologies fashion copies, and the theorizing of copies has been neglected. We may think a copy is the same as what it copies, but no two objects can really be the same. "The same" means similar enough as an acceptable substitute for some purpose. The differences between usefully similar things are also often important, in forensic analysis, for example, or inferential processes. Status as a copy is only one form of relationship between objects, but copies are so integral to information science that they demand a theory. Indeed, theorizing copies provides a basis for a more complete and unified view of information science.

0.0012620769 = product of:
  0.0075724614 = sum of:
    0.0075724614 = weight(_text_:in in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0075724614 = score(doc=1007,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.12752387 = fieldWeight in 1007, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1007)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss and clarify a possible realist foundation of domain analysis and knowledge organization, and in this vein, investigate into how the concept of information is to be understood at a lower but necessary conceptual level in domain analysis. Design/methodology/approach The paper investigates into the foundation of domain analysis as formulated by Birger Hjørland, and develops a realist framework for domain analytical information and knowledge organization based on critical realism. Findings Information can meaningfully be considered as the prerequisite for domain analysis, and critical realism may provide for a realist ontological framework for domain analysis and knowledge organization. Originality/value The paper includes new insights into the foundation of information and domain analysis.

0.0010517307 = product of:
  0.006310384 = sum of:
    0.006310384 = weight(_text_:in in 5651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006310384 = score(doc=5651,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10626988 = fieldWeight in 5651, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5651)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Purpose Information literacy has been consistently undertheorised. The purpose of this paper is to contribute in the ongoing theorisation of information literacy by exploring the meaning and implications of the emergent grounded theory of mitigating risk for information literacy research and practice. Design/methodology/approach The grounded theory was produced through a qualitative study that was framed by practice theory and the theoretical constructs of cognitive authority and affordance, and employed constructivist grounded theory, semi-structured interviews and photo-elicitation methods to explore the information literacy practices of language-learners overseas. Findings This paper provides a theoretically rich exploration of language-learner information literacy practices while further identifying the importance of time, affect and information creation within information literacy research and practice as well as the need for the continued theorisation of information literacy concepts. Research limitations/implications The paper's constructivist grounded theorisation of information literacy remains localised and contextualised rather than generalisable. Practical implications The paper raises questions and points of reflection that may be used to inform the continued development of information literacy instruction and teaching practices. Originality/value This paper contributes to an increasingly sophisticated theoretical conceptualisation of information literacy as well as forming a basis for ongoing theoretical development in the field.

8.9242304E-4 = product of:
  0.005354538 = sum of:
    0.005354538 = weight(_text_:in in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005354538 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 637, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=637)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This paper explores collaborative information behavior in the context of highly politicized decision making. It draws upon a qualitative case study of project management of a contentious public sector infrastructure project. We noted the creation of spaces for the development and exchange of information by experts and conceptualize these as information spheres. We postulate that these were formed to bypass power-induced information behavior that excludes expert power, such as information avoidance. This approach contrasts with the expected project management and information norms, rules and behavior, however, provides a language that can be used to explain the phenomena of bounded information spaces which complement and may be used as a development of adjunct to small world's theory.