Search (50 results, page 3 of 3)

3.1201506E-4 = product of:
  0.005304256 = sum of:
    0.005304256 = weight(_text_:in in 411) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005304256 = score(doc=411,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 411, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=411)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

As the prevalence of online misinformation grows increasingly apparent, our need to understand its spread becomes more essential. Trolling, in particular, may aggravate the spread of misinformation online. While many studies have investigated the negative impact of trolling and misinformation on social media, less attention has been devoted to the relationships between the two and their manifestation on social question and answer (SQA) sites. We examine the extent of and relationships between trolling and misinformation on SQA sites. Through content analysis of 8,401 posts (159 questions and 8,242 answers) from the Yahoo Answers! Politics & Government and Society & Culture categories, we identified levels of and relationships between misinformation and trolling. We find that trolling and misinformation tend to reinforce themselves and each other and that trolling and misinformation are more common in the Politics & Government category than in the Society & Culture category. Our study is among the first to consider the prevalence of and relationship between misinformation and trolling on SQA sites.

3.1201506E-4 = product of:
  0.005304256 = sum of:
    0.005304256 = weight(_text_:in in 527) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005304256 = score(doc=527,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 527, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=527)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

Information behavior theory covers different aspects of the totality of information-related human behavior rather unevenly. The transitions or trading zones between different types of information activities have remained perhaps especially under-theorized. This article interrogates and expands a conceptual apparatus of information making and information taking as a pair of substantial concepts for explaining, in part, the mobility of information in terms of doing that unfolds as a process of becoming rather than of being, and in part, what is happening when information comes into being and when something is taken up for use as information. Besides providing an apparatus to describe the nexus of information provision and acquisition, a closer consideration of the parallel doings opens opportunities to enrich the inquiry of the conditions and practice of information seeking, appropriation, discovery, and retrieval as modes taking, and learning and information use as its posterities.

2.972191E-4 = product of:
  0.005052725 = sum of:
    0.005052725 = weight(_text_:in in 5768) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005052725 = score(doc=5768,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.14877784 = fieldWeight in 5768, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5768)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

In this position article, we synthesize various knowledge gaps in information privacy scholarship and propose a research agenda that promotes greater cross-disciplinary collaboration within the iSchool community and beyond. We start by critically examining Westin's conceptualization of information privacy and argue for a contextual approach that holds promise for overcoming some of Westin's weaknesses. We then highlight three contextual considerations for studying privacy-digital networks, marginalized populations, and the global context-and close by discussing how these considerations advance privacy theorization and technology design.

2.6001257E-4 = product of:
  0.004420214 = sum of:
    0.004420214 = weight(_text_:in in 353) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004420214 = score(doc=353,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = 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)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

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

2.6001257E-4 = product of:
  0.004420214 = sum of:
    0.004420214 = weight(_text_:in in 382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004420214 = score(doc=382,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = 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)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

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

2.5475924E-4 = product of:
  0.004330907 = sum of:
    0.004330907 = weight(_text_:in in 487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004330907 = score(doc=487,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = 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)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

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.

2.5475924E-4 = product of:
  0.004330907 = sum of:
    0.004330907 = weight(_text_:in in 1007) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.004330907 = score(doc=1007,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = 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)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

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.

2.1229935E-4 = product of:
  0.003609089 = sum of:
    0.003609089 = weight(_text_:in in 5651) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.003609089 = score(doc=5651,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = 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)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

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.

2.0801005E-4 = product of:
  0.0035361708 = sum of:
    0.0035361708 = weight(_text_:in in 624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0035361708 = score(doc=624,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = queryNorm
        0.1041228 = fieldWeight in 624, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=624)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

Abstract

For decades, we have been told we live in the "information age"-a time when disruptive technological advancement has reshaped the categories and social uses of knowledge and when quantitative assessment is increasingly privileged. Such methodologies and concepts of information are usually considered the provenance of the natural and social sciences, which present them as politically and philosophically neutral. Yet the humanities should and do play an important role in interpreting and critiquing the historical, cultural, and conceptual nature of information. This book is one of two companion volumes that explore theories and histories of information from a humanistic perspective. They consider information as a long-standing feature of social, cultural, and conceptual management, a matter of social practice, and a fundamental challenge for the humanities today. Bringing together essays by prominent critics, Information: Keywords highlights the humanistic nature of information practices and concepts by thinking through key terms. It describes and anticipates directions for how the humanities can contribute to our understanding of information from a range of theoretical, historical, and global perspectives. Together with Information: A Reader, it sets forth a major humanistic vision of the concept of information.

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 73(2022) no7., S.1058-1061 (Lai Ma).

1.8014197E-4 = product of:
  0.0030624135 = sum of:
    0.0030624135 = weight(_text_:in in 637) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0030624135 = score(doc=637,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.033961542 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.024967048 = 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)
  0.05882353 = coord(1/17)

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.